611 research outputs found

    GenERRate: generating errors for use in grammatical error detection

    Get PDF
    This paper explores the issue of automatically generated ungrammatical data and its use in error detection, with a focus on the task of classifying a sentence as grammatical or ungrammatical. We present an error generation tool called GenERRate and show how GenERRate can be used to improve the performance of a classifier on learner data. We describe initial attempts to replicate Cambridge Learner Corpus errors using GenERRate

    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%

    Can Subcategorisation Probabilities Help a Statistical Parser?

    Full text link
    Research into the automatic acquisition of lexical information from corpora is starting to produce large-scale computational lexicons containing data on the relative frequencies of subcategorisation alternatives for individual verbal predicates. However, the empirical question of whether this type of frequency information can in practice improve the accuracy of a statistical parser has not yet been answered. In this paper we describe an experiment with a wide-coverage statistical grammar and parser for English and subcategorisation frequencies acquired from ten million words of text which shows that this information can significantly improve parse accuracy.Comment: 9 pages, uses colacl.st

    Detecting grammatical errors with treebank-induced, probabilistic parsers

    Get PDF
    Today's grammar checkers often use hand-crafted rule systems that define acceptable language. The development of such rule systems is labour-intensive and has to be repeated for each language. At the same time, grammars automatically induced from syntactically annotated corpora (treebanks) are successfully employed in other applications, for example text understanding and machine translation. At first glance, treebank-induced grammars seem to be unsuitable for grammar checking as they massively over-generate and fail to reject ungrammatical input due to their high robustness. We present three new methods for judging the grammaticality of a sentence with probabilistic, treebank-induced grammars, demonstrating that such grammars can be successfully applied to automatically judge the grammaticality of an input string. Our best-performing method exploits the differences between parse results for grammars trained on grammatical and ungrammatical treebanks. The second approach builds an estimator of the probability of the most likely parse using grammatical training data that has previously been parsed and annotated with parse probabilities. If the estimated probability of an input sentence (whose grammaticality is to be judged by the system) is higher by a certain amount than the actual parse probability, the sentence is flagged as ungrammatical. The third approach extracts discriminative parse tree fragments in the form of CFG rules from parsed grammatical and ungrammatical corpora and trains a binary classifier to distinguish grammatical from ungrammatical sentences. The three approaches are evaluated on a large test set of grammatical and ungrammatical sentences. The ungrammatical test set is generated automatically by inserting common grammatical errors into the British National Corpus. The results are compared to two traditional approaches, one that uses a hand-crafted, discriminative grammar, the XLE ParGram English LFG, and one based on part-of-speech n-grams. In addition, the baseline methods and the new methods are combined in a machine learning-based framework, yielding further improvements

    Implicit reference to citations: a study of astronomy

    Get PDF
    The research in this paper presents results in the automatic classification of pronouns within articles into those which refer to cited research and those which do not. It also discusses the automatic linking of pronouns which do refer to citations to their corresponding citations. The current study focused on the pronoun they as used in papers in Astronomy journals. The paper describes a classifier trained on maximum entropy principles using features defined by the distance to preceding citations and the category of verbs associated to the pronoun under consideration

    Improving Syntactic Parsing of Clinical Text Using Domain Knowledge

    Get PDF
    Syntactic parsing is one of the fundamental tasks of Natural Language Processing (NLP). However, few studies have explored syntactic parsing in the medical domain. This dissertation systematically investigated different methods to improve the performance of syntactic parsing of clinical text, including (1) Constructing two clinical treebanks of discharge summaries and progress notes by developing annotation guidelines that handle missing elements in clinical sentences; (2) Retraining four state-of-the-art parsers, including the Stanford parser, Berkeley parser, Charniak parser, and Bikel parser, using clinical treebanks, and comparing their performance to identify better parsing approaches; and (3) Developing new methods to reduce syntactic ambiguity caused by Prepositional Phrase (PP) attachment and coordination using semantic information. Our evaluation showed that clinical treebanks greatly improved the performance of existing parsers. The Berkeley parser achieved the best F-1 score of 86.39% on the MiPACQ treebank. For PP attachment, our proposed methods improved the accuracies of PP attachment by 2.35% on the MiPACQ corpus and 1.77% on the I2b2 corpus. For coordination, our method achieved a precision of 94.9% and a precision of 90.3% for the MiPACQ and i2b2 corpus, respectively. To further demonstrate the effectiveness of the improved parsing approaches, we applied outputs of our parsers to two external NLP tasks: semantic role labeling and temporal relation extraction. The experimental results showed that performance of both tasks’ was improved by using the parse tree information from our optimized parsers, with an improvement of 3.26% in F-measure for semantic role labelling and an improvement of 1.5% in F-measure for temporal relation extraction

    Improving dependency label accuracy using statistical post-editing: A cross-framework study

    Get PDF
    We present a statistical post-editing method for modifying the dependency labels in a dependency analysis. We test the method using two English datasets, three parsing systems and three labelled dependency schemes. We demonstrate how it can be used both to improve dependency label accuracy in parser output and highlight problems with and differences between constituency-to-dependency conversions

    Learning Recursive Segments for Discourse Parsing

    Full text link
    Automatically detecting discourse segments is an important preliminary step towards full discourse parsing. Previous research on discourse segmentation have relied on the assumption that elementary discourse units (EDUs) in a document always form a linear sequence (i.e., they can never be nested). Unfortunately, this assumption turns out to be too strong, for some theories of discourse like SDRT allows for nested discourse units. In this paper, we present a simple approach to discourse segmentation that is able to produce nested EDUs. Our approach builds on standard multi-class classification techniques combined with a simple repairing heuristic that enforces global coherence. Our system was developed and evaluated on the first round of annotations provided by the French Annodis project (an ongoing effort to create a discourse bank for French). Cross-validated on only 47 documents (1,445 EDUs), our system achieves encouraging performance results with an F-score of 73% for finding EDUs.Comment: published at LREC 201
    • 

    corecore