Discovery of Linguistic Relations Using Lexical Attraction

This work has been motivated by two long term goals: to understand how humans learn language and to build programs that can understand language. Using a representation that makes the relevant features explicit is a prerequisite for successful learning and understanding. Therefore, I chose to represent relations between individual words explicitly in my model. Lexical attraction is defined as the likelihood of such relations. I introduce a new class of probabilistic language models named lexical attraction models which can represent long distance relations between words and I formalize this new class of models using information theory. Within the framework of lexical attraction, I developed an unsupervised language acquisition program that learns to identify linguistic relations in a given sentence. The only explicitly represented linguistic knowledge in the program is lexical attraction. There is no initial grammar or lexicon built in and the only input is raw text. Learning and processing are interdigitated. The processor uses the regularities detected by the learner to impose structure on the input. This structure enables the learner to detect higher level regularities. Using this bootstrapping procedure, the program was trained on 100 million words of Associated Press material and was able to achieve 60% precision and 50% recall in finding relations between content-words. Using knowledge of lexical attraction, the program can identify the correct relations in syntactically ambiguous sentences such as ``I saw the Statue of Liberty flying over New York.''Comment: dissertation, 56 page

CLiFF Notes: Research in the Language Information and Computation Laboratory of The University of Pennsylvania

This report takes its name from the Computational Linguistics Feedback Forum (CLIFF), an informal discussion group for students and faculty. However the scope of the research covered in this report is broader than the title might suggest; this is the yearly report of the LINC Lab, the Language, Information and Computation Laboratory of the University of Pennsylvania. It may at first be hard to see the threads that bind together the work presented here, work by faculty, graduate students and postdocs in the Computer Science, Psychology, and Linguistics Departments, and the Institute for Research in Cognitive Science. It includes prototypical Natural Language fields such as: Combinatorial Categorial Grammars, Tree Adjoining Grammars, syntactic parsing and the syntax-semantics interface; but it extends to statistical methods, plan inference, instruction understanding, intonation, causal reasoning, free word order languages, geometric reasoning, medical informatics, connectionism, and language acquisition. With 48 individual contributors and six projects represented, this is the largest LINC Lab collection to date, and the most diverse

Apportioning Development Effort in a Probabilistic LR Parsing System through Evaluation

We describe an implemented system for robust domain-independent syntactic parsing of English, using a unification-based grammar of part-of-speech and punctuation labels coupled with a probabilistic LR parser. We present evaluations of the system's performance along several different dimensions; these enable us to assess the contribution that each individual part is making to the success of the system as a whole, and thus prioritise the effort to be devoted to its further enhancement. Currently, the system is able to parse around 80% of sentences in a substantial corpus of general text containing a number of distinct genres. On a random sample of 250 such sentences the system has a mean crossing bracket rate of 0.71 and recall and precision of 83% and 84% respectively when evaluated against manually-disambiguated analyses.Comment: 10 pages, 1 Postscript figure. To Appear in Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, University of Pennsylvania, May 199

CLiFF Notes: Research In Natural Language Processing at the University of Pennsylvania

CLIFF is the Computational Linguists\u27 Feedback Forum. We are a group of students and faculty who gather once a week to hear a presentation and discuss work currently in progress. The \u27feedback\u27 in the group\u27s name is important: we are interested in sharing ideas, in discussing ongoing research, and in bringing together work done by the students and faculty in Computer Science and other departments. However, there are only so many presentations which we can have in a year. We felt that it would be beneficial to have a report which would have, in one place, short descriptions of the work in Natural Language Processing at the University of Pennsylvania. This report then, is a collection of abstracts from both faculty and graduate students, in Computer Science, Psychology and Linguistics. We want to stress the close ties between these groups, as one of the things that we pride ourselves on here at Penn is the communication among different departments and the inter-departmental work. Rather than try to summarize the varied work currently underway at Penn, we suggest reading the abstracts to see how the students and faculty themselves describe their work. The report illustrates the diversity of interests among the researchers here, as well as explaining the areas of common interest. In addition, since it was our intent to put together a document that would be useful both inside and outside of the university, we hope that this report will explain to everyone some of what we are about

Proceedings of QG2010: The Third Workshop on Question Generation

These are the peer-reviewed proceedings of "QG2010, The Third Workshop on Question Generation". The workshop included a special track for "QGSTEC2010: The First Question Generation Shared Task and Evaluation Challenge". QG2010 was held as part of The Tenth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS2010)

CLiFF Notes: Research in the Language, Information and Computation Laboratory of the University of Pennsylvania

One concern of the Computer Graphics Research Lab is in simulating human task behavior and understanding why the visualization of the appearance, capabilities and performance of humans is so challenging. Our research has produced a system, called Jack, for the definition, manipulation, animation and human factors analysis of simulated human figures. Jack permits the envisionment of human motion by interactive specification and simultaneous execution of multiple constraints, and is sensitive to such issues as body shape and size, linkage, and plausible motions. Enhanced control is provided by natural behaviors such as looking, reaching, balancing, lifting, stepping, walking, grasping, and so on. Although intended for highly interactive applications, Jack is a foundation for other research. The very ubiquitousness of other people in our lives poses a tantalizing challenge to the computational modeler: people are at once the most common object around us, and yet the most structurally complex. Their everyday movements are amazingly fluid, yet demanding to reproduce, with actions driven not just mechanically by muscles and bones but also cognitively by beliefs and intentions. Our motor systems manage to learn how to make us move without leaving us the burden or pleasure of knowing how we did it. Likewise we learn how to describe the actions and behaviors of others without consciously struggling with the processes of perception, recognition, and language. Present technology lets us approach human appearance and motion through computer graphics modeling and three dimensional animation, but there is considerable distance to go before purely synthesized figures trick our senses. We seek to build computational models of human like figures which manifest animacy and convincing behavior. Towards this end, we: Create an interactive computer graphics human model; Endow it with reasonable biomechanical properties; Provide it with human like behaviors; Use this simulated figure as an agent to effect changes in its world; Describe and guide its tasks through natural language instructions. There are presently no perfect solutions to any of these problems; ultimately, however, we should be able to give our surrogate human directions that, in conjunction with suitable symbolic reasoning processes, make it appear to behave in a natural, appropriate, and intelligent fashion. Compromises will be essential, due to limits in computation, throughput of display hardware, and demands of real-time interaction, but our algorithms aim to balance the physical device constraints with carefully crafted models, general solutions, and thoughtful organization. The Jack software is built on Silicon Graphics Iris 4D workstations because those systems have 3-D graphics features that greatly aid the process of interacting with highly articulated figures such as the human body. Of course, graphics capabilities themselves do not make a usable system. Our research has therefore focused on software to make the manipulation of a simulated human figure easy for a rather specific user population: human factors design engineers or ergonomics analysts involved in visualizing and assessing human motor performance, fit, reach, view, and other physical tasks in a workplace environment. The software also happens to be quite usable by others, including graduate students and animators. The point, however, is that program design has tried to take into account a wide variety of physical problem oriented tasks, rather than just offer a computer graphics and animation tool for the already computer sophisticated or skilled animator. As an alternative to interactive specification, a simulation system allows a convenient temporal and spatial parallel programming language for behaviors. The Graphics Lab is working with the Natural Language Group to explore the possibility of using natural language instructions, such as those found in assembly or maintenance manuals, to drive the behavior of our animated human agents. (See the CLiFF note entry for the AnimNL group for details.) Even though Jack is under continual development, it has nonetheless already proved to be a substantial computational tool in analyzing human abilities in physical workplaces. It is being applied to actual problems involving space vehicle inhabitants, helicopter pilots, maintenance technicians, foot soldiers, and tractor drivers. This broad range of applications is precisely the target we intended to reach. The general capabilities embedded in Jack attempt to mirror certain aspects of human performance, rather than the specific requirements of the corresponding workplace. We view the Jack system as the basis of a virtual animated agent that can carry out tasks and instructions in a simulated 3D environment. While we have not yet fooled anyone into believing that the Jack figure is real , its behaviors are becoming more reasonable and its repertoire of actions more extensive. When interactive control becomes more labor intensive than natural language instructional control, we will have reached a significant milestone toward an intelligent agent

The language faculty that wasn't : a usage-based account of natural language recursion

In the generative tradition, the language faculty has been shrinking—perhaps to include only the mechanism of recursion. This paper argues that even this view of the language faculty is too expansive. We first argue that a language faculty is difficult to reconcile with evolutionary considerations. We then focus on recursion as a detailed case study, arguing that our ability to process recursive structure does not rely on recursion as a property of the grammar, but instead emerges gradually by piggybacking on domain-general sequence learning abilities. Evidence from genetics, comparative work on non-human primates, and cognitive neuroscience suggests that humans have evolved complex sequence learning skills, which were subsequently pressed into service to accommodate language. Constraints on sequence learning therefore have played an important role in shaping the cultural evolution of linguistic structure, including our limited abilities for processing recursive structure. Finally, we re-evaluate some of the key considerations that have often been taken to require the postulation of a language faculty