2,497 research outputs found

    Training and Scaling Preference Functions for Disambiguation

    Get PDF
    We present an automatic method for weighting the contributions of preference functions used in disambiguation. Initial scaling factors are derived as the solution to a least-squares minimization problem, and improvements are then made by hill-climbing. The method is applied to disambiguating sentences in the ATIS (Air Travel Information System) corpus, and the performance of the resulting scaling factors is compared with hand-tuned factors. We then focus on one class of preference function, those based on semantic lexical collocations. Experimental results are presented showing that such functions vary considerably in selecting correct analyses. In particular we define a function that performs significantly better than ones based on mutual information and likelihood ratios of lexical associations.Comment: To appear in Computational Linguistics (probably volume 20, December 94). LaTeX, 21 page

    Coordinate noun phrase disambiguation in a generative parsing model

    Get PDF
    In this paper we present methods for improving the disambiguation of noun phrase (NP) coordination within the framework of a lexicalised history-based parsing model. As well as reducing noise in the data, we look at modelling two main sources of information for disambiguation: symmetry in conjunct structure, and the dependency between conjunct lexical heads. Our changes to the baseline model result in an increase in NP coordination dependency f-score from 69.9% to 73.8%, which represents a relative reduction in f-score error of 13%

    Data-Oriented Language Processing. An Overview

    Full text link
    During the last few years, a new approach to language processing has started to emerge, which has become known under various labels such as "data-oriented parsing", "corpus-based interpretation", and "tree-bank grammar" (cf. van den Berg et al. 1994; Bod 1992-96; Bod et al. 1996a/b; Bonnema 1996; Charniak 1996a/b; Goodman 1996; Kaplan 1996; Rajman 1995a/b; Scha 1990-92; Sekine & Grishman 1995; Sima'an et al. 1994; Sima'an 1995-96; Tugwell 1995). This approach, which we will call "data-oriented processing" or "DOP", embodies the assumption that human language perception and production works with representations of concrete past language experiences, rather than with abstract linguistic rules. The models that instantiate this approach therefore maintain large corpora of linguistic representations of previously occurring utterances. When processing a new input utterance, analyses of this utterance are constructed by combining fragments from the corpus; the occurrence-frequencies of the fragments are used to estimate which analysis is the most probable one. In this paper we give an in-depth discussion of a data-oriented processing model which employs a corpus of labelled phrase-structure trees. Then we review some other models that instantiate the DOP approach. Many of these models also employ labelled phrase-structure trees, but use different criteria for extracting fragments from the corpus or employ different disambiguation strategies (Bod 1996b; Charniak 1996a/b; Goodman 1996; Rajman 1995a/b; Sekine & Grishman 1995; Sima'an 1995-96); other models use richer formalisms for their corpus annotations (van den Berg et al. 1994; Bod et al., 1996a/b; Bonnema 1996; Kaplan 1996; Tugwell 1995).Comment: 34 pages, Postscrip

    Combining semantic and syntactic structure for language modeling

    Full text link
    Structured language models for speech recognition have been shown to remedy the weaknesses of n-gram models. All current structured language models are, however, limited in that they do not take into account dependencies between non-headwords. We show that non-headword dependencies contribute to significantly improved word error rate, and that a data-oriented parsing model trained on semantically and syntactically annotated data can exploit these dependencies. This paper also contains the first DOP model trained by means of a maximum likelihood reestimation procedure, which solves some of the theoretical shortcomings of previous DOP models.Comment: 4 page
    corecore