BibSonomyburst/user/diego_ma/parsersBibSonomy RSS feed for /user/diego_ma/parsers2012-02-16T11:55:08+01:00http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2bfe1bcdf4bfddae0a45f6da902264899/diego_madiego_ma2009-05-15T06:50:52+02:00parsers biomedicine evaluation <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Pyysalo">Sampo Pyysalo</a>, <a href="/author/Ginter">Filip Ginter</a>, <a href="/author/Pahikkala">Tapio Pahikkala</a>, <a href="/author/Boberg">Jorma Boberg</a>, <a href="/author/Jarvinen">Jouni Jarvinen</a>, and <a href="/author/Salakoski">Tapio Salakoski</a> </span><em>International Journal of Medical Informatics</em> <em>75(6):430--442</em> (<em>June 2006</em>)Fri May 15 06:50:52 CEST 2009Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing for Biomedical Applications Special IssueInternational Journal of Medical InformaticsJune6430--442Evaluation of two dependency parsers on biomedical corpus targeted at protein-protein interactions752006parsers biomedicine evaluation We present an evaluation of Link Grammar and Connexor Machinese Syntax, two major broad-coverage dependency parsers, on a custom hand-annotated corpus consisting of sentences regarding protein-protein interactions. In the evaluation, we apply the notion of an interaction subgraph, which is the subgraph of a dependency graph expressing a protein-protein interaction. We measure the performance of the parsers for recovery of individual dependencies, fully correct parses, and interaction subgraphs. For Link Grammar, an open system that can be inspected in detail, we further perform a comprehensive failure analysis, report specific causes of error, and suggest potential modifications to the grammar. We find that both parsers perform worse on biomedical English than previously reported on general English. While Connexor Machinese Syntax significantly outperforms Link Grammar, the failure analysis suggests specific ways in which the latter could be modified for better performance in the domain.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2eebfa8ea98b57038c7ab6b564fb1a6b2/diego_madiego_ma2009-05-15T06:33:15+02:00dependencies constituency parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/de Marneffe">Marie-Catherine de Marneffe</a>, <a href="/author/MacCartney">Bill MacCartney</a>, and <a href="/author/Manning">Christopher D. Manning</a> </span><em>LREC, </em>(<em>2006</em>)Fri May 15 06:33:15 CEST 2009LRECGenerating Typed Dependency Parses from Phrase Structure Trees2006dependencies constituency parsers literature-log.bib 1/21/2009http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2eab6ac76852418d7a1152c3db01d4469/diego_madiego_ma2009-03-18T07:34:11+01:00HPSG parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Sagae">Kenji Sagae</a>, <a href="/author/Miyao">Yusuke Miyao</a>, and <a href="/author/Tsujii">Jun&#039;ichi Tsujii</a> </span><em>Proc. ACL 2007, </em><em>page 624-631. </em>(<em>2007</em>)Wed Mar 18 07:34:11 CET 2009Proc. ACL 2007624-631HPSG Parsing with Shallow Dependency Constraints2007HPSG parsers We present a novel framework that combines strengths from surface syntactic parsing and deep syntactic parsing to increase deep parsing accuracy, specifically by combining dependency and HPSG parsing. We show that by using surface dependencies to constrain the application of wide-coverage HPSG rules, we can benefit from a number of parsing techniques designed for high-accuracy dependency parsing, while actually performing deep syntactic analysis. Our framework results in a 1.4% absolute improvement over a state-of-the-art approach for wide coverage HPSG parsing.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2d6b7a57d24e1dcfaa6c19a00abbed61d/diego_madiego_ma2009-01-16T00:52:58+01:00HPSG parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Miyao">Yusuke Miyao</a>, <a href="/author/Ninomiya">Takashi Ninomiya</a>, and <a href="/author/Tsujii">Jun&#039;ichi Tsujii</a> </span><em>Proceedings of IJCNLP-04, </em><em>8 pages, </em>(<em>2004</em>)Fri Jan 16 00:52:58 CET 20098 pagesProceedings of IJCNLP-04Corpus-oriented Grammar Development for Acquiring a Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar from the Penn Treebank2004HPSG parsers This paper describes a method of semi-automatically acquiring an English HPSG grammar from the Penn Treebank. First, heuristic rules are employed to annotate the treebank with partially-specified derivation trees. Lexical entries are automatically extracted from the annotated corpus by inversely applying schemata to partially-specified derivation trees.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2cafa3f81913c1ecb25362d7cb6369a30/diego_madiego_ma2009-01-16T00:48:33+01:00parsers evaluation <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Miyao">Yusuke Miyao</a>, <a href="/author/Sagae">Kenji Sagae</a>, and <a href="/author/Tsujii">Jun&#039;ichi Tsujii</a> </span><em>Proceedings of the GEAF 2007 Workshop, </em><em>page 21 pages. </em><em>CSLI Publications, </em>(<em>2007</em>)Fri Jan 16 00:48:33 CET 2009Proceedings of the GEAF 2007 Workshop21 pagesCSLI Studies in Computational Linguistics OnlineTowards Framework-Independent Evaluation of Deep Linguistic Parsers2007parsers evaluation This paper describes practical issues in the framework-independent evaluation of deep and shallow parsers. We focus on the use of two dependency-based syntactic representation formats in parser evaluation, namely, Carroll et al. (1998)'s Grammatical Relations and de Marneffe et al. (2006)'s Stanford Dependency scheme. Our approach is to convert the output of parsers into these two formats, and measure the accuracy of the resulting converted output. Through the evaluation of an HPSG parser and Penn Treebank phrase structure parsers, we found that mapping between different representation schemes is a non-trivial task that results in lossy conversions that may obscure important differences between different parsing approaches. We discuss sources of disagreements in the representation of syntactic structures in the two dependency-based formats, indicating possible directions for improved framework-independent parser evaluation.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2a9ae1ef031141fe460eaa6deea6036d7/diego_madiego_ma2008-01-29T08:19:28+01:00parsers evaluation AnswerFinder gram_rels molla_publication <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Mollá">Diego Mollá</a>, and <a href="/author/Hutchinson">Ben Hutchinson</a> </span><em>Proc. European Association for Computational Linguistics EACL, workshop on Evaluation Initiatives in Natural Language Processing, </em><em>page 43-50. </em><em>Budapest, </em><em>Association for Computational Linguistics, </em><em>ACL, </em>(<em>April 2003</em>)Tue Jan 29 08:19:28 CET 2008BudapestProc. European Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL), workshop on Evaluation Initiatives in Natural Language ProcessingApril43-50Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Evaluations of Parsing Systems2003parsers evaluation AnswerFinder gram_rels molla_publication A wide range of parser and/or grammar evaluation methods have been reported in the literature. However, in most cases these evaluations take the parsers independently (intrinsic evaluations), and only in a few cases has the effect of different parsers in real applications been measured (extrinsic evaluations). This paper compares two evaluations of the Link Grammar parser and the Conexor Functional Dependency Grammar parser. The parsing systems, despite both being dependency-based, return different types of dependencies, making a direct comparison impossible. In the intrinsic evaluation, the accuracy of the parsers is compared independently by converting the dependencies into grammatical relations and using the methodology of \newcite{Carroll:1998} for parser comparison. In the extrinsic evaluation, the parsers' impact in a practical application is compared within the context of answer extraction. The differences in the results are significant.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2ddf167520fb423a651e0c5dcb062f1f2/diego_madiego_ma2008-01-29T08:16:55+01:00AnswerFinder parsers evaluation gram_rels molla_publication <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Mollá">Diego Mollá</a>, and <a href="/author/Hutchinson">Ben Hutchinson</a> </span>(<em>2002</em>)<em>In preparation . </em>Tue Jan 29 08:16:55 CET 2008In preparationIn Vitro and In Vivo Evaluations of Parsing Systems Within the Context of Answer Extraction2002AnswerFinder parsers evaluation gram_rels molla_publication A wide variety of parser and/or grammar evaluation methods have been reported in the literature. However, in most cases these evaluations take the parsers independently (\emph{in vitro} evaluations), and only in a few cases has the effect of different parsers in real applications been measured (\emph{in vivo} evaluations). This paper compares two evaluations of the Link Grammar parser and the Conexor Functional Dependency Grammar parser. The parsing systems, despite both being dependency-based, return different types of dependencies, making a direct comparison impossible. In the first evaluation, the accuracy of the parsers is compared \emph{in vitro} by converting the dependencies into grammatical relations and using the methodology of \newcite{Carroll:1998} for parser comparison. In the second evaluation, the parsers' impact in a practical application is compared \emph{in vivo} within the context of answer extraction. The differences in the results are significant and raise questions on the usefulness of purely \emph{in vitro} evaluations.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2ceeb4c834e0ee7d49c13264699a4cccc/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:47:25+01:00parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Tomita">Masaru Tomita</a> </span><em>Computational Linguistics</em> <em>12(1-2):31-46</em> (<em>1987</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:47:25 CET 2007Computational Linguistics1-231-46An Efficient Augmented-Context-Free Parsing Algorithm121987parsers http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2adf365ba5fc1ce3136690a7ce415943d/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:47:16+01:00DG parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Tapanainen">Pasi Tapanainen</a>, and <a href="/author/Järvinen">Timo Järvinen</a> </span><em>Proc. ANLP-97, </em><em>ACL, </em>(<em>1997</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:47:16 CET 2007Proc. ANLP-97A Non-Projective Dependency Parser1997DG parsers http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/28c8e987ef02e6cc03b67cb73cabcfb81/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:46:18+01:00DG parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Schneider">Gerold Schneider</a> </span>(<em>November 1998</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:46:18 CET 2007NovFunctional Non-Projective Parsing with Dependency Grammar ({DG})1998DG parsers http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/21c7c841480ab52567c6eba2f9a46d1ea/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:46:16+01:00dependencies parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Schneider">Gerold Schneider</a> </span><em>Proc. Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories TLT 2003, </em>(<em>2003</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:46:16 CET 2007Proc. Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories (TLT 2003)Extracting and Using Trace-Free Functional Dependencies from the Penn Treebank to Reduce Parsing Complexity2003dependencies parsers Many extensions to text-based, data-intensive knowledge management approaches, such as Information Retrieval or Data Mining, focus on integrating the impressive recent advances in language technology. For this, they need fast, robust parsers that deliver linguistic data which is meaningful for the subsequent processing stages. This paper introduces such a parsing system. Its output is a hierarchical structure of syntactic relations, functional dependency structures ...http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/230d08b19997804a63847dece1d45e94c/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:46:13+01:00parsers evaluation <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Scarlett">Elizabeth Scarlett</a>, and <a href="/author/Szpkowicz">Stan Szpkowicz</a> </span><em>Proc. Thirteenth Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, </em><em>Montreal, </em>(<em>2000</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:46:13 CET 2007MontrealProc. Thirteenth Canadian Conference on Artificial IntelligenceThe Power of the {TSNLP}: Lessons from a Diagnostic Evaluation of a Broad-Coverage Parser2000parsers evaluation We show a diagnostic evaluation of DIPETT, a broad-coverage parser of English sentences. We consider the TSNLP suite as a diagnostic tool, and propose an alternative broader-coverage test suite of test sentences extracted from Quirk et al. We compare the diagnostic effectiveness of the two suites, and draw a few general conclusions. The evaluation results were used to make significant improvements to DIPETT.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/29bce113e9807b86273add0de1371b1bf/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:46:12+01:00parsers evaluation <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Scarlett">Elizabeth Scarlett</a> </span><em>University of Ottawa, </em>(<em>2000</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:46:12 CET 2007An Evaluation of a Rule-Based Parser of English Sentences2000parsers evaluation ... The thesis argues that a test suite for a broad coverage natural language parser must necessarily be systematic, broad in its coverage of phenomena tested, and corpus-like in its coverage of phenomenon interaction. A test suite of example sentences extracted from Quirk et al.'s comprehensive English grammar is proposed, and the results of evaluating DIPETT on that suite are compared with the evaluation results on a publicly available test suite, TSNLP (Test Suites for Natural Language Processing).http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2ecb48cd1d1818a0015f7128de2257088/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:45:54+01:00parsers statistic_nlp <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Roark">Brian Roark</a>, and <a href="/author/Johnson">Mark Johnson</a> </span><em>Proc. ACL&#039;99, </em><em>page 421-428. </em>(<em>1999</em>)<em>http://arXiv.org/abs/cs/0008017 . </em>Fri Dec 14 02:45:54 CET 2007Proc. ACL'99\myurl{http://arXiv.org/abs/cs/0008017}421-428Efficient Probabilistic Top-down and Left-corner Parsing1999parsers statistic_nlp This paper examines efficient predictive broad-coverage parsing without dynamic programming. In contrast to bottom-up methods, depth-first top-down parsing produces partial parses that are fully connected trees spanning the entire left context, from which any kind of non-local dependency or partial semantic interpretation can in principle be read. We contrast two predictive parsing approaches, top-down and left-corner parsing, and find both to be viable. In addition, we find that enhancement with non-local information not only improves parser accuracy, but also substantially improves the search efficiency.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/251c6c453e35444581d457f1ce7a1bd47/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:44:41+01:00parsers DG <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Oy">Conexor Oy</a> </span><em>Conexor Oy, </em>(<em>2002</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:44:41 CET 2007Conexor Functional Dependency Grammar 3.7 --- User's Manual2002parsers DG http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/241c0fe4de5685916d5590b532a6aaf21/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:42:27+01:00parsers DG <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Lin">Dekang Lin</a> </span><em>Proc. Workshop on the Evaluation of Parsing Systems, </em>(<em>1998</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:42:27 CET 2007Proc. Workshop on the Evaluation of Parsing SystemsGranadaDependency-based Evaluation of MINIPAR1998parsers DG http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/29528c683d9619ad5ddfcdcef3b53e527/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:41:28+01:00parsers flat_semantics generation <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Kay">Martin Kay</a> </span><em>Proc. 34th Annual Meeting of the ACL, </em><em>page 200-204. </em><em>Santa Cruz, CA, </em>(<em>1996</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:41:28 CET 2007Santa Cruz, CAProc. 34th Annual Meeting of the {ACL}200-204Chart Generation1996parsers flat_semantics generation Charts constitute a natural uniform architecture for parsing and generation provided string position is replaced by a notion more appropriate to logical forms and that measures are taken to curtail generation paths containing semantically incomplete phrases.http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2091f05f27343211c2de2026f170636a7/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:41:13+01:00DG parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Järvinen">Timo Järvinen</a>, and <a href="/author/Tapanainen">Pasi Tapanainen</a> </span><em>TR-1. </em><em>Department of Linguistics, University of Helsinki, </em><em>Helsinki, </em>(<em>1997</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:41:13 CET 2007HelsinkiTR-1A Dependency Parser for English1997DG parsers http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2af6bba29a67b01af8301f8835261f2ee/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:41:12+01:00DG parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Järvinen">Timo Järvinen</a>, and <a href="/author/Tapanainen">Pasi Tapanainen</a> </span><em>Proc. of COLING-ACL. Workshop: Processing of Dependency Grammars, </em>(<em>1998</em>)Fri Dec 14 02:41:12 CET 2007Proc. of COLING-ACL. Workshop: Processing of Dependency GrammarsTowards an Implementable Dependency Grammar1998DG parsers http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/20a37e92c2b525d7245974b61c6ec31f1/diego_madiego_ma2007-12-14T02:40:13+01:00parsers <span class="authorEditorList"><a href="/author/Henderson">John C. Henderson</a>, and <a href="/author/Brill">Eric Brill</a> </span><em>Proc. EMNLP-99, </em><em>page 187-194. </em><em>College Park, Maryland, </em>(<em>1999</em>)<em>Also in arXiv:cs.CL/0006003 . </em>Fri Dec 14 02:40:13 CET 2007College Park, MarylandProc. EMNLP-99Also in arXiv:cs.CL/0006003187-194Exploiting Diversity in Natural Language Processing: Combining Parsers1999parsers Three state-of-the-art statistical parsers are combined to produce more accurate parses, as well as new bounds on achievable Treebank parsing accuracy. Two general approaches are presented and two combination techniques are described for each approach. Both parametric and non-parametric models are explored. The resulting parsers surpass the best previously published performance results for the Penn Treebank.