%0 
%0 Report
%A Mernik, Marjan; \v C,repin\v s,ek, Matej; Gerli\v c,, Goran; \v Z,umer, Viljem; Bryant, Barrett R. & Sprague, Alan
%D 2003
%T Learning Context-Free Grammars using an Evolutionary Approach
%E 
%B 
%C 
%I University of Maribor and The University of Alabama at Birginham
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9 
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 techreport
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Mernik:2003
%K machine_learning grammar
%X Machine learning of grammars finds many applications in syntactic pattern recognition, computational biology, natural language acquisition, etc. In this paper a new application of grammatical inference is suggested. Development of domain-specific languages is a hard problem for domain experts not versed in programming language design. We believe that syntax of a small domain-specific language can be inferred from positive and negative programs provided by domain experts. In our work we are the using genetic programming approach in grammatical inference. Grammar-specific heuristic operators and non-random construction of the initial population are proposed to achieve this task. Suitability of the approach is shown by small examples where underlying context-free grammars are successfully inferred.
%Z 
%U http://www.comp.mq.edu.au/~asloane/plrg/reading/genPar03.pdf
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Manuscript
%A Christiansen, Henning
%D 2002
%T CHR Grammmars
%E
%B 
%C
%I
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 unpublished
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Christiansen:2002
%K constraint_programming grammar prolog
%X A grammar formalism based upon CHR is proposed analogously to the way Definite Clause Grammars are defined and implemented on top of Prolog. These grammars execute as robust bottom-up parsers with an inherent treatment of ambiguity and a high flexibility to model various linguistic phenomena...
%Z Submitted to journal Theory and Practice of Logic Programming
%U http://www.dat.ruc.dk/~henning/chrg/PapersOnCHRG/index.html
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Generic
%A Christiansen, Henning
%D 2002
%T User's Guide to CHR Grammars
%E
%B 
%C
%I \myurl{http://www.dat.ruc.dk/\~{}henning/chrg/CHRGusersGuide.html}
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 November
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 misc
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Christiansen:2002b
%K constraint_programming grammar prolog
%X This document explains how to use CHRG which is a grammar notation implemented on top of the CHR language of Constraint Handling Rules. CHR is an extension to Prolog with committed choice multiple-headed rules. You need to have a recent version of SICSTUS Prolog installed on your computer that supports the CHR library.
%Z Visited 28 August 2003
%U http://www.dat.ruc.dk/\~{}henning/chrg/CHRGusersGuide.html
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Conference Proceedings
%A Pullum, Geoffrey K. & Scholz, Barbara C.
%D 2001
%T On the Distinction between Model-Theoretic and Generative-Enumerative Syntactic Frameworks
%E de Groote, Philippe; Morrill, Glyn & Retor\'e,, Christian
%B Proceedings LACL 2001
%C Berlin Heidelberg
%I Springer-Verlag
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 17-43
%& 
%Y 
%S Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence
%7
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 inproceedings
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Pullum:2001
%K grammar constraint_programming
%X Two kinds of framework for stating grammars of natural languages emerged during the 20th century. Here we call them generativeenumerative syntax (GES)an d model-theoretic syntax (MTS). They are based on very different mathematics. GES developed in the 1950s out of Post's work on the syntactic side of logic. MTS arose somewhat later out of the semantic side of logic. We identify some distinguishing theoretical features of these frameworks, relating to cardinality of the set of expressions, size of individual expressions, and �transderivational constraints�. We then turn to three kinds of linguistic phenomena: partial grammaticality, the syntactic properties of expression fragments, and the fact that the lexicon of any natural language is in constant flux, and conclude that MTS has some major advantages for linguistic description that have been overlooked. We briefly consider the issue of what natural languages in MTS terms, and touch on implications for parsing and acquisition.
%Z 
%U http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/lacl/lacl2001.html#PullumS01
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Conference Proceedings
%A van Zaanen, Menno
%D 2000
%T ABL: Alignment-Based Learning
%E 
%B COLING 2000 - Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computational Linguistics
%C 
%I 
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 961--967
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 inproceedings
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F vanZaanen:2000:2
%K machine_learning grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U http://www.ics.mq.edu.au/\~{}menno/docs/p_coling00.pdf
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Conference Proceedings
%A van Zaanen, Menno
%D 2000
%T Bootstrapping Syntax and Recursion using Alignment-Based Learning
%E Langley, Pat
%B Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Machine Learning
%C 
%I Morgan Kaufmann Publishers
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 1063--1070
%& 
%Y Stanford University
%S 
%7
%8 July
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 inproceedings
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F vanZaanen:2000
%K machine_learning grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U http://www.ics.mq.edu.au/\~{}menno/docs/p_icml00.pdf
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Book
%A Borsley, Robert D.
%D 1996
%T Modern Phrase Structure Grammar
%E 
%B 
%C Oxford
%I Blackwell
%V 
%6
%N 
%P
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7 
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 book
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Borsley:1996
%K grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Book
%A 
%D 1996
%T Discontinuous Constituency
%E Bunt, Harry & van Horck, Arthur
%B 
%C Berlin
%I Mouton de Gruyer
%V 
%6
%N 
%P
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7 
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 book
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Bunt:1996
%K grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Report
%A Covington, Michael A.
%D 1994
%T GULP 3.1: An Extension of Prolog for Unification-Based Grammar
%E 
%B 
%C 
%I Artificial Intelligence Center, The University of Georgia
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9 
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ AI-1994-06
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 techreport
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Covington:1994:3
%K NLP grammar prolog
%X 
%Z 
%U http://www.ai.uga.edu/\~{}mc/
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Journal Article
%A McCord, Michael; Bernth, Arendse; Lappin, Shalom & Zadrozny, Wlodek
%D 1992
%T Natural Language Processing within a Slot Grammar Framework
%E 
%B International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools
%C 
%I 
%V 1
%6
%N 2
%P 229-277
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 article
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F McCord:1992
%K NLP grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Report
%A Carroll, John; Briscoe, Ted & Grover, Claire
%D 1991
%T A Development Environment for Large Natural Language Grammars
%E 
%B 
%C 
%I Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9 
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 techreport
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Carroll:1991
%K grammar computer
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Book
%A Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
%D 1985
%T A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language
%E 
%B 
%C London
%I Longman
%V 
%6
%N 
%P
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7 
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 book
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Quirk:1985:G
%K grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Journal Article
%A Dahl, \"O,ster
%D 1980
%T Some Arguments for Higher Nodes in Syntax: A Reply to Hudson's `Constituency and Dependency'
%E 
%B Linguistics
%C 
%I 
%V 18
%6
%N 
%P 484-488
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 article
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Dahl:1980
%K DG grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Journal Article
%A Hudson, Richard
%D 1980
%T A Second Attack on Constituency
%E 
%B Linguistics
%C 
%I 
%V 18
%6
%N 
%P 489-504
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 article
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Hudson:1980b
%K DG grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Journal Article
%A Hudson, Richard
%D 1980
%T Constituency and Dependency
%E 
%B Linguistics
%C 
%I 
%V 18
%6
%N 
%P 170-198
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 article
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Hudson:1980a
%K DG grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Book
%A Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sidney; Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan
%D 1972
%T A Grammar of Contemporary English
%E 
%B 
%C Harlow, UK
%I Longman
%V 
%6
%N 
%P
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7 
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 book
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Quirk:1972
%K grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Book Section
%A Baumg\"a,rtner, K.
%D 1970
%T Konstituenz und Dependenz. Zur Integration der beiden grammatischen Prinzipien.
%E Steger, H.
%B Vorschl{\"a}ge f{\"u}r eine strukturale {G}rammatik des {D}eutschen
%C Darmstadt
%I Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft
%V 
%6
%N 
%P 
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7 
%8 
%9 
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 incollection
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Baumgaertner:1970
%K DG grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^

%0 
%0 Journal Article
%A Gaifman, H.
%D 1965
%T Dependency Systems and Phrase-Structure Systems
%E 
%B Information and Control
%C 
%I 
%V 8
%6
%N 
%P 304-337
%& 
%Y 
%S 
%7
%8 
%9
%? 
%! 
%Z 
%@ 
%(
%)
%*
%L
%M
%1 
%2 
%3 article
%4 
%# 
%$ 
%F Gaifman:1965
%K DG grammar
%X 
%Z 
%U 
%+
%^