Statistical parsing of morphologically rich languages (SPMRL): what, how and whither

The term Morphologically Rich Languages (MRLs) refers to languages in which significant information concerning syntactic units and relations is expressed at word-level. There is ample evidence that the application of readily available statistical parsing models to such languages is susceptible to serious performance degradation. The first workshop on statistical parsing of MRLs hosts a variety of contributions which show that despite language-specific idiosyncrasies, the problems associated with parsing MRLs cut across languages and parsing frameworks. In this paper we review the current state-of-affairs with respect to parsing MRLs and point out central challenges. We synthesize the contributions of researchers working on parsing Arabic, Basque, French, German, Hebrew, Hindi and Korean to point out shared solutions across languages. The overarching analysis suggests itself as a source of directions for future investigations

Evaluating automatically acquired f-structures against PropBank

An automatic method for annotating the Penn-II Treebank (Marcus et al., 1994) with high-level Lexical Functional Grammar (Kaplan and Bresnan, 1982; Bresnan, 2001; Dalrymple, 2001) f-structure representations is presented by Burke et al. (2004b). The annotation algorithm is the basis for the automatic acquisition of wide-coverage and robust probabilistic approximations of LFG grammars (Cahill et al., 2004) and for the induction of subcategorisation frames (O’Donovan et al., 2004; O’Donovan et al., 2005). Annotation quality is, therefore, extremely important and to date has been measured against the DCU 105 and the PARC 700 Dependency Bank (King et al., 2003). The annotation algorithm achieves f-scores of 96.73% for complete f-structures and 94.28% for preds-only f-structures against the DCU 105 and 87.07% against the PARC 700 using the feature set of Kaplan et al. (2004). Burke et al. (2004a) provides detailed analysis of these results. This paper presents an evaluation of the annotation algorithm against PropBank (Kingsbury and Palmer, 2002). PropBank identifies the semantic arguments of each predicate in the Penn-II treebank and annotates their semantic roles. As PropBank was developed independently of any grammar formalism it provides a platform for making more meaningful comparisons between parsing technologies than was previously possible. PropBank also allows a much larger scale evaluation than the smaller DCU 105 and PARC 700 gold standards. In order to perform the evaluation, first, we automatically converted the PropBank annotations into a dependency format. Second, we developed conversion software to produce PropBank-style semantic annotations in dependency format from the f-structures automatically acquired by the annotation algorithm from Penn-II. The evaluation was performed using the evaluation software of Crouch et al. (2002) and Riezler et al. (2002). Using the Penn-II Wall Street Journal Section 24 as the development set, currently we achieve an f-score of 76.58% against PropBank for the Section 23 test set

Treebank-based multilingual unification-grammar development

Broad-coverage, deep unification grammar development is time-consuming and costly. This problem can be exacerbated in multilingual grammar development scenarios. Recently (Cahill et al., 2002) presented a treebank-based methodology to semi-automatically create broadcoverage, deep, unification grammar resources for English. In this paper we present a project which adapts this model to a multilingual grammar development scenario to obtain robust, wide-coverage, probabilistic Lexical-Functional Grammars (LFGs) for English and German via automatic f-structure annotation algorithms based on the Penn-II and TIGER treebanks. We outline our method used to extract a probabilistic LFG from the TIGER treebank and report on the quality of the f-structures produced. We achieve an f-score of 66.23 on the evaluation of 100 random sentences against a manually constructed gold standard

Treebank-based acquisition of wide-coverage, probabilistic LFG resources: project overview, results and evaluation

This paper presents an overview of a project to acquire wide-coverage, probabilistic Lexical-Functional Grammar (LFG) resources from treebanks. Our approach is based on an automatic annotation algorithm that annotates “raw” treebank trees with LFG f-structure information approximating to basic predicate-argument/dependency structure. From the f-structure-annotated treebank we extract probabilistic unification grammar resources. We present the annotation algorithm, the extraction of lexical information and the acquisition of wide-coverage and robust PCFG-based LFG approximations including long-distance dependency resolution. We show how the methodology can be applied to multilingual, treebank-based unification grammar acquisition. Finally we show how simple (quasi-)logical forms can be derived automatically from the f-structures generated for the treebank trees

Treebank-based acquisition of a Chinese lexical-functional grammar

Scaling wide-coverage, constraint-based grammars such as Lexical-Functional Grammars (LFG) (Kaplan and Bresnan, 1982; Bresnan, 2001) or Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammars (HPSG) (Pollard and Sag, 1994) from fragments to naturally occurring unrestricted text is knowledge-intensive, time-consuming and (often prohibitively) expensive. A number of researchers have recently presented methods to automatically acquire wide-coverage, probabilistic constraint-based grammatical resources from treebanks (Cahill et al., 2002, Cahill et al., 2003; Cahill et al., 2004; Miyao et al., 2003; Miyao et al., 2004; Hockenmaier and Steedman, 2002; Hockenmaier, 2003), addressing the knowledge acquisition bottleneck in constraint-based grammar development. Research to date has concentrated on English and German. In this paper we report on an experiment to induce wide-coverage, probabilistic LFG grammatical and lexical resources for Chinese from the Penn Chinese Treebank (CTB) (Xue et al., 2002) based on an automatic f-structure annotation algorithm. Currently 96.751% of the CTB trees receive a single, covering and connected f-structure, 0.112% do not receive an f-structure due to feature clashes, while 3.137% are associated with multiple f-structure fragments. From the f-structure-annotated CTB we extract a total of 12975 lexical entries with 20 distinct subcategorisation frame types. Of these 3436 are verbal entries with a total of 11 different frame types. We extract a number of PCFG-based LFG approximations. Currently our best automatically induced grammars achieve an f-score of 81.57% against the trees in unseen articles 301-325; 86.06% f-score (all grammatical functions) and 73.98% (preds-only) against the dependencies derived from the f-structures automatically generated for the original trees in 301-325 and 82.79% (all grammatical functions) and 67.74% (preds-only) against the dependencies derived from the manually annotated gold-standard f-structures for 50 trees randomly selected from articles 301-325

Recovering non-local dependencies for Chinese

To date, work on Non-Local Dependencies (NLDs) has focused almost exclusively on English and it is an open research question how well these approaches migrate to other languages. This paper surveys non-local dependency constructions in Chinese as represented in the Penn Chinese Treebank (CTB) and provides an approach for generating proper predicate-argument-modifier structures including NLDs from surface contextfree phrase structure trees. Our approach recovers non-local dependencies at the level of Lexical-Functional Grammar f-structures, using automatically acquired subcategorisation frames and f-structure paths linking antecedents and traces in NLDs. Currently our algorithm achieves 92.2% f-score for trace insertion and 84.3% for antecedent recovery evaluating on gold-standard CTB trees, and 64.7% and 54.7%, respectively, on CTBtrained state-of-the-art parser output trees

Evaluation of an automatic f-structure annotation algorithm against the PARC 700 dependency bank

An automatic method for annotating the Penn-II Treebank (Marcus et al., 1994) with high-level Lexical Functional Grammar (Kaplan and Bresnan, 1982; Bresnan, 2001; Dalrymple, 2001) f-structure representations is described in (Cahill et al., 2002; Cahill et al., 2004a; Cahill et al., 2004b; O’Donovan et al., 2004). The annotation algorithm and the automatically-generated f-structures are the basis for the automatic acquisition of wide-coverage and robust probabilistic approximations of LFG grammars (Cahill et al., 2002; Cahill et al., 2004a) and for the induction of LFG semantic forms (O’Donovan et al., 2004). The quality of the annotation algorithm and the f-structures it generates is, therefore, extremely important. To date, annotation quality has been measured in terms of precision and recall against the DCU 105. The annotation algorithm currently achieves an f-score of 96.57% for complete f-structures and 94.3% for preds-only f-structures. There are a number of problems with evaluating against a gold standard of this size, most notably that of overfitting. There is a risk of assuming that the gold standard is a complete and balanced representation of the linguistic phenomena in a language and basing design decisions on this. It is, therefore, preferable to evaluate against a more extensive, external standard. Although the DCU 105 is publicly available, 1 a larger well-established external standard can provide a more widely-recognised benchmark against which the quality of the f-structure annotation algorithm can be evaluated. For these reasons, we present an evaluation of the f-structure annotation algorithm of (Cahill et al., 2002; Cahill et al., 2004a; Cahill et al., 2004b; O’Donovan et al., 2004) against the PARC 700 Dependency Bank (King et al., 2003). Evaluation against an external gold standard is a non-trivial task as linguistic analyses may differ systematically between the gold standard and the output to be evaluated as regards feature geometry and nomenclature. We present conversion software to automatically account for many (but not all) of the systematic differences. Currently, we achieve an f-score of 87.31% for the f-structures generated from the original Penn-II trees and an f-score of 81.79% for f-structures from parse trees produced by Charniak’s (2000) parser in our pipeline parsing architecture against the PARC 700

Two approaches to automatic matching of atomic grammatical features in LFG

The alignment of a bilingual corpus is an important step in data preparation for data-driven machine translation. LFG f-structures provide bilexical labelled dependencies in the form of lemmas and core grammatical functions linking those lemmas, but also important grammatical features (TENSE, NUMBER, CASE, etc.) representing morphological and semantic information. These grammatical features can often be translated independently from the lemmas or words. It is therefore of practical interest to develop methods that align grammatical features which can be considered translations of each other (e.g. the number features of the corresponding words in the source and target parts of the corpus) in data-driven LFG-based MT. In a parallel grammar development scenario, such as ParGram, this is to a large extent captured through manually hardcoding the correspondences in the hand-crafted grammars, using similar or identical feature names for similar phenomena across languages. However, for a completely automatic learning method it is desirable to establish these correspondences without human assistance. In this paper we present and evaluate two approaches to the automatic identification of correspondences between atomic features of LFG (and similar) grammars for different languages. The methods can be used to evaluate the correspondence between feature names in hand-crafted parallel grammars or find correspondences between features in grammars for different languages where feature alignments are not known

Exploiting multi-word units in statistical parsing and generation

Syntactic parsing is an important prerequisite for many natural language processing (NLP) applications. The task refers to the process of generating the tree of syntactic nodes with associated phrase category labels corresponding to a sentence. Our objective is to improve upon statistical models for syntactic parsing by leveraging multi-word units (MWUs) such as named entities and other classes of multi-word expressions. Multi-word units are phrases that are lexically, syntactically and/or semantically idiosyncratic in that they are to at least some degree non-compositional. If such units are identified prior to, or as part of, the parsing process their boundaries can be exploited as islands of certainty within the very large (and often highly ambiguous) search space. Luckily, certain types of MWUs can be readily identified in an automatic fashion (using a variety of techniques) to a near-human level of accuracy. We carry out a number of experiments which integrate knowledge about different classes of MWUs in several commonly deployed parsing architectures. In a supplementary set of experiments, we attempt to exploit these units in the converse operation to statistical parsing---statistical generation (in our case, surface realisation from Lexical-Functional Grammar f-structures). We show that, by exploiting knowledge about MWUs, certain classes of parsing and generation decisions are more accurately resolved. This translates to improvements in overall parsing and generation results which, although modest, are demonstrably significant