LFG without C-structures

We explore the use of two dependency parsers, Malt and MST, in a Lexical Functional Grammar parsing pipeline. We compare this to the traditional LFG parsing pipeline which uses constituency parsers. We train the dependency parsers not on classical LFG f-structures but rather on modified dependency-tree versions of these in which all words in the input sentence are represented and multiple heads are removed. For the purposes of comparison, we also modify the existing CFG-based LFG parsing pipeline so that these "LFG-inspired" dependency trees are produced. We find that the differences in parsing accuracy over the various parsing architectures is small

DCU-Paris13 systems for the SANCL 2012 shared task

The DCU-Paris13 team submitted three systems to the SANCL 2012 shared task on parsing English web text. The first submission, the highest ranked constituency parsing system, uses a combination of PCFG-LA product grammar parsing and self-training. In the second submission, also a constituency parsing system, the n-best lists of various parsing models are combined using an approximate sentence-level product model. The third system, the highest ranked system in the dependency parsing track, uses voting over dependency arcs to combine the output of three constituency parsing systems which have been converted to dependency trees. All systems make use of a data-normalisation component, a parser accuracy predictor and a genre classifier

Why is German dependency parsing more reliable than constituent parsing?

In recent years, research in parsing has extended in several new directions. One of these directions is concerned with parsing languages other than English. Treebanks have become available for many European languages, but also for Arabic, Chinese, or Japanese. However, it was shown that parsing results on these treebanks depend on the types of treebank annotations used. Another direction in parsing research is the development of dependency parsers. Dependency parsing profits from the non-hierarchical nature of dependency relations, thus lexical information can be included in the parsing process in a much more natural way. Especially machine learning based approaches are very successful (cf. e.g.). The results achieved by these dependency parsers are very competitive although comparisons are difficult because of the differences in annotation. For English, the Penn Treebank has been converted to dependencies. For this version, Nivre et al. report an accuracy rate of 86.3%, as compared to an F-score of 92.1 for Charniaks parser. The Penn Chinese Treebank is also available in a constituent and a dependency representations. The best results reported for parsing experiments with this treebank give an F-score of 81.8 for the constituent version and 79.8% accuracy for the dependency version. The general trend in comparisons between constituent and dependency parsers is that the dependency parser performs slightly worse than the constituent parser. The only exception occurs for German, where F-scores for constituent plus grammatical function parses range between 51.4 and 75.3, depending on the treebank, NEGRA or TüBa-D/Z. The dependency parser based on a converted version of Tüba-D/Z, in contrast, reached an accuracy of 83.4%, i.e. 12 percent points better than the best constituent analysis including grammatical functions

Parsing as Reduction

We reduce phrase-representation parsing to dependency parsing. Our reduction is grounded on a new intermediate representation, "head-ordered dependency trees", shown to be isomorphic to constituent trees. By encoding order information in the dependency labels, we show that any off-the-shelf, trainable dependency parser can be used to produce constituents. When this parser is non-projective, we can perform discontinuous parsing in a very natural manner. Despite the simplicity of our approach, experiments show that the resulting parsers are on par with strong baselines, such as the Berkeley parser for English and the best single system in the SPMRL-2014 shared task. Results are particularly striking for discontinuous parsing of German, where we surpass the current state of the art by a wide margin

Statistical dependency parsing of Turkish

This paper presents results from the first statistical dependency parser for Turkish. Turkish is a free-constituent order language with complex agglutinative inflectional and derivational morphology and presents interesting challenges for statistical parsing, as in general, dependency relations are between “portions” of words called inflectional groups. We have explored statistical models that use different representational units for parsing. We have used the Turkish Dependency Treebank to train and test our parser but have limited this initial exploration to that subset of the treebank sentences with only left-to-right non-crossing dependency links. Our results indicate that the best accuracy in terms of the dependency relations between inflectional groups is obtained when we use inflectional groups as units in parsing, and when contexts around the dependent are employed