Automated discourse segmentation by syntactic information and cue phrases

Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference. Applied Informatics

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 293-298

  Le Thanh, Huong ^a   Abeysinghe, Geetha ^a   Huyck, Christian ^a  

^a MIDDLESEX UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cue Phrases; Discourse Segmentation; Natural Language Processing; Syntactic Information

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; DATA REDUCTION; LEARNING SYSTEMS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; SYNTACTICS; TECHNICAL PRESENTATIONS;

CUE PHRASES; DISCOURSE SEGMENTATION; LINEAR SEGMENTATION; SYNTACTIC INFORMATION;

TEXT PROCESSING;

EID: 11144272032     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Mann, W. C. and Thompson, S. A., Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a Functional Theory of Text Organization, Text, 8, 1988, 243-281.
2. Grosz, B.J. and Sidner C.L., Attention, intentions and the structure of discourse, Computational Linguistics, 12, 1986, 175-204.
3. Marcu, D., The Rhetorical Parsing, Summarisation, and Generation of Natural Language Texts (Ph.D. Thesis: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, 1997).
4. Morris, J., & Hirst, G., Lexical Cohesion Computed by Thesaural Relations as an Indicator of the Structure of the Text, Computational Linguistics, 17, 1991, 21-28.
5. Kozima, H., Computing lexical cohesion as a tool for text analysis (Ph.D. Thesis: Graduate School of Electro-Communications, University of Electro-Communications, 1994).
6. Okumura, M. and Honda, T., Word Sense Disambiguation and Text Segmentation Based on Lexical Cohesion, Proc. of the 15th Conf. on Computational Linguistics (COLING-94), 2, 1994, 755-761.
7. Passonneau, R. J. and Litman, D. J., Discourse Segmentation by Human and Automated Means, Computational Linguistics, 23(1), 1997, 103-139.
8. Forbes, K. and Miltsakaki, E., Empirical Studies of Centering Shifts and Cue Phrases as Embedded Segment Boundary Markers, Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 7(2), 2002, 39-57.
9. Batliner, A., Kompe, R., Kießling, A., Niemann, H., and Nöth, E., Syntactic-Prosodic Labeling Of Large Spontaneous Speech Data-Bases, Proc. of ICSLP, USA, 1996.
10. Corston-Oliver, S., Computing Representations of the Structure of Written Discourse (Ph.D. Thesis: University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, U.S.A, 1998).
11. Webber, B. L., Structure and ostension in the interpretation of discourse deixis, Language and Cognitive Processes, 6(2), 1991, 107-135.
12. Carlson, L., Marcu, D., and Okurowski, M. E., RST Discourse Treebank, LDC, 2002.
13. Marcus, M. P., Santorini, B. and Marcinkiewicz, M.A., Penn Treebank II, LDC, 1995.
14. Carlson, L. and Marcu, D., Discourse Tagging Manual, ISI Tech Report, ISI-TR-545, 2001.
15. Bies, A. et al., Bracketing Guidelines for Treebank II Style, Penn Treebank Project, 1995.
16. Carlson, L., Marcu, D., and Okurowski, M. E., Eight documents of the RST Discourse Treebank (from http://www.isi.edu/%7Emarcu/, 2002)
17. Litman, D. J. and Passonneau, R. J., Intention-based segmentation: Human reliability and correlation with linguistic cues, Proc. of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 1993, 148-155.
18. Marcu, D., A Decision-Based Approach to Rhetorical Parsing, The 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Maryland, 1999, 365-372.