Graph transformations in data-driven dependency parsing

COLING/ACL 2006 - 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Conference

Volumn 1, Issue , 2006, Pages 257-264

  Nilsson, Jens ^a   Nivre, Joakim ^a,b   Hall, Johan ^a  

^a LINNAEUS UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS;

COORDINATE STRUCTURES; DEPENDENCY PARSER; DEPENDENCY PARSING; DETERMINISTIC DATA; GRAPH TRANSFORMATION; PRAGUE DEPENDENCY TREEBANK; STATISTICAL PARSING; SYNTACTIC REPRESENTATION;

SYNTACTICS;

EID: 34447622659     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3115/1220175.1220208     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Daniel M. Bikel. 2004. Intricacies of Collins' parsing model. Computational Linguistics, 30:479-511.
2. Alena Böhmová, Jan Hajič, Eva Hajičová, and Barbora Hladká. 2003. The Prague Dependency Treebank: A three-level annotation scenario. In Anne Abeillé, editor, Treebanks: Building and Using Syntactically Annotated Corpora. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
3. Chih-Chung Chang and Chih-Jen Lin. 2005. LIBSVM: A library for support vector machines. Eugene Charniak. 2000. A maximum-entropyinspired parser. In Proceedings of the First Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL), pages 132-139.
4. Michael Collins, Jan Hajič, Eric Brill, Lance Ramshaw, and Christoph Tillmann. 1999. A statistical parser for Czech. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 505-512.
5. Michael Collins. 1997. Three generative, lexicalised models for statistical parsing. In Proceedings of the 35th Annatual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 16-23.
6. Michael Collins. 1999. Head-Driven Statistical Models for Natural Language Parsing. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
7. Walter Daelemans and Antal Van den Bosch. 2005. Memory-Based Language Processing. Cambridge University Press.
8. Jason Eisner and Noah A. Smith. 2005. Parsing with soft and hard constraints on dependency length. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT).
9. Jan Hajič, Barbora Vidova Hladka, Jarmila Panevová, Eva Hajičová, Petr Sgall, and Petr Pajas. 2001. Prague Dependency Treebank 1.0. LDC, 2001T10.
10. Jan Hajič. 1998. Building a Syntactically Annotated Corpus: The Prague Dependency Treebank. In Issues of Valency and Meaning, pages 12-19. Prague Karolinum, Charles University Press.
11. Keith Hall and Vaclav Novák. 2005. Corrective modeling for non-projective dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT).
12. Richard Hudson. 1990. English Word Grammar. Basil Blackwell.
13. Mark Johnson. 1998. Pcfg models of linguistic tree representations. Computational Linguistics, 24:613-632.
14. Dan Klein and Christopher Manning. 2003. Accurate unlexicalized parsing. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 423-430.
15. Vincenzo Lombardo and Leonardo Lesmo. 1998. Unit coordination and gapping in dependency theory. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Processing of Dependency-Based Grammars, pages 11-20.
16. Ryan McDonald and Fernando Pereira. 2006. Online learning of approximate dependency parsing algorithms. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL).
17. Igor Mel'cuk. 1988. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice. State University of New York Press.
18. Joakim Nivre and Johan Hall. 2005. MaltParser: A language-independent systemfor data-driven dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories (TLT), pages 137-148.
19. Joakim Nivre and Jens Nilsson. 2005. Pseudoprojective dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 99-106.
20. Joakim Nivre, Johan Hall, and Jens Nilsson. 2006. MaltParser: A data-driven parser-generator for dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation.
21. Joakim Nivre. 2003. An efficient algorithm for projective dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 8th InternationalWorkshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT), pages 149-160.
22. Jong C. Park and Hyung Joon Cho. 2000. Informed parsing for coordination with combinatory categorial grammar. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), pages 593-599.
23. Kenji Sagae and Alon Lavie. 2005. A classifier-based parser with linear run-time complexity. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT), pages 125-132.
24. Petr Sgall, Eva Hajičová, and Jarmila Panevová. 1986. The Meaning of the Sentence in Its Pragmatic Aspects. Reidel.
25. Lucien Tesnière. 1959. Éléments de syntaxe structurale. Editions Klincksieck.
26. Daniel Zeman and Zdeněk Žabokrtský. 2005. Improving parsing accuracy by combining diverse dependency parsers. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT).
27. Daniel Zeman. 2004. Parsing with a Statistical Dependency Model. Ph.D. thesis, Charles University.