A comparison of parsing technologies for the biomedical domain

This paper reports on a number of experiments which are designed to investigate the extent to which current nlp resources are able to syntactically and semantically analyse biomedical text. We address two tasks: parsing a real corpus with a hand-built widecoverage grammar, producing both syntactic analyses and logical forms; and automatically computing the interpretation of compound nouns where the head is a nominalisation (e.g., hospital arrival means an arrival at hospital, while patient arrival means an arrival of a patient). For the former task we demonstrate that exible and yet constrained `preprocessing ' techniques are crucial to success: these enable us to use part-of-speech tags to overcome inadequate lexical coverage, and to `package up' complex technical expressions prior to parsing so that they are blocked from creating misleading amounts of syntactic complexity. We argue that the xml-processing paradigm is ideally suited for automatically preparing the corpus for parsing. For the latter task, we compute interpretations of the compounds by exploiting surface cues and meaning paraphrases, which in turn are extracted from the parsed corpus. This provides an empirical setting in which we can compare the utility of a comparatively deep parser vs. a shallow one, exploring the trade-o between resolving attachment ambiguities on the one hand and generating errors in the parses on the other. We demonstrate that a model of the meaning of compound nominalisations is achievable with the aid of current broad-coverage parsers

A Computational Model of Conceptual Combination

We describe the Interactional-Constraint (ICON) model of conceptual combination. This model is based on the idea that combinations are interpreted by incrementally constraining the range of interpretation according to the interacting influence of both constituent nouns. ICON consists of a series of discrete stages, combining data from the British National Corpus, the WordNet lexicon and the Web to predict the dominant interpretation of a combination and a range of factors relating to ease of interpretation. One of the major advantages of the model is that it does not require a tailored knowledge base, thus broadening its scope and utility. We evaluate ICON’s reliability and find that it is accurate in predicting word senses and relations for a wide variety of combinations. However, its ability to predict ease of interpretation is poor. The implications for models of conceptual combination are discussed

Opinion Holder and Target Extraction on Opinion Compounds – A Linguistic Approach

We present an approach to the new task of opinion holder and target extraction on opinion compounds. Opinion compounds (e.g. user rating or victim support) are noun compounds whose head is an opinion noun. We do not only examine features known to be effective for noun compound analysis, such as paraphrases and semantic classes of heads and modifiers, but also propose novel features tailored to this new task. Among them, we examine paraphrases that jointly consider holders and targets, a verb detour in which noun heads are replaced by related verbs, a global head constraint allowing inferencing between different compounds, and the categorization of the sentiment view that the head conveys

Transfer and Multi-Task Learning for Noun-Noun Compound Interpretation

In this paper, we empirically evaluate the utility of transfer and multi-task learning on a challenging semantic classification task: semantic interpretation of noun--noun compounds. Through a comprehensive series of experiments and in-depth error analysis, we show that transfer learning via parameter initialization and multi-task learning via parameter sharing can help a neural classification model generalize over a highly skewed distribution of relations. Further, we demonstrate how dual annotation with two distinct sets of relations over the same set of compounds can be exploited to improve the overall accuracy of a neural classifier and its F1 scores on the less frequent, but more difficult relations.Comment: EMNLP 2018: Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP