Performance evaluation for text processing of noisy inputs

Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing

Volumn 1, Issue , 2005, Pages 759-763

  Lopresti, Daniel ^a  

^a Lehigh University   (United States)

Author keywords

Optical character recognition; Part of speech tagging; Performance evaluation; Sentence boundary detection; Tokenization

Indexed keywords

PART-OF-SPEECH TAGGING; PERFORMANCE EVALUATION; SENTENCE BOUNDARY DETECTION; TOKENIZATION;

ERROR ANALYSIS; OPTICAL CHARACTER RECOGNITION; PATTERN MATCHING; PIPELINES; PROBLEM SOLVING;

TEXT PROCESSING;

EID: 33644553071     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1066677.1066851     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. L. R. Blando, J. Kanai, and T. A. Nartker. Prediction of OCR accuracy using simple image features. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition, pages 319-322, Montréal, Canada, August 1995.
2. M. Cannon, J. Hochberg, and P. Kelly. Quality assessment and restoration of typewritten document images. Technical Report LA-UR 99-1233, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1999.
3. J. Esakov, D. P. Lopresti, and J. S. Sandberg. Classification and distribution of optical character recognition errors. In Proceedings of Document Recognition I (IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging), volume 2181, pages 204-216, San Jose, CA, February 1994.
4. J. Esakov, D. P. Lopresti, J. S. Sandberg, and J. Zhou. Issues in automatic OCR error classification. In Proceedings of the Third Annual Symposium on Document Analysis and Information Retrieval, pages 401-412, Las Vegas, NV, April 1994.
5. Y. Gotoh and S. Renais. Sentence boundary detection in broadcast speech transcripts. In Proceedomgs of ISCA Tutorial and Research Workshop ASR-2000, Paris, France, 2000.
6. V. Govindaraju and S. N. Srihari. Assessment of image quality to predict readability of documents. In Proceedings of Document Recognition III (IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging), volume 2660, pages 333-342, San Jose, CA, January 1996.
7. C. Hori and S. Furui. Advances in automatic speech summarization. In Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, pages 1771-1774, Aalborg, Denmark, 2001.
8. H. Jing, D. Lopresti, and C. Shih. Summarizing noisy documents. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Document Image Understanding Technology, pages 111-119, April 2003.
9. D. P. Lopresti. A comparison of text-based methods for detecting duplication in scanned document databases. Information Retrieval, 4(2):153-173, July 2001.
10. R. MacIntyre. Penn Treebank tokenizer (sed script source code), 1995. http://www.cis.upenn.edu/treebank/tokenizer.sed.
11. D. Miller, S. Boisen, R. Schwartz, R. Stone, and R. Weischedel. Named entity extraction from noisy input: Speech and OCR. In Proceedings of the 6th Applied Natural Language Processing Conference, pages 316-324, Seattle, WA, 2000.
12. S. B. Needleman and C. D. Wunsch. A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino-acid sequences of two proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology, 48:443-453, 1970.
13. D. D. Palmer and M. Ostendorf. Improving information extraction by modeling errors in speech recognizer output. In J. Allan, editor, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Human Language Technology Research, 2001.
14. Project Gutenberg, September 2004. http://www.gutenberg.net/.
15. A. Ratnaparkhi. A maximum entropy part-of-speech tagger. In Proceedings of the Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing Conference, May 1996. ftp://ftp.cis.upenn.edu/pub/adwait/jmx/jmx.tar.gz.
16. J. C. Reynar and A. Ratnaparkhi. A maximum entropy approach to identifying sentence boundaries. In Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, Washington, DC, March-April 1997. ftp://ftp.cis.upenn.edu/pub/adwait/jmx/jmx.tar.gz.
17. J. Schulenburg et al. GOCR (open source software). September 2004. http://jocr.sourceforge.net/index.html.
18. K. Taghva, J. Borsack, and A. Condit. Effects of OCR errors on ranking and feedback using the vector space model. Information Processing and Management, 32(3):317-327, 1996.
19. K. Taghva, J. Borsack, and A. Condit. Evaluation of model-based retrieval effectiveness with OCR text. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 14:64-93, January 1996.
20. R. A. Wagner and M. J. Fischer. The string-to-string correction problem. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery, 21:168-173, 1974.