A twin-candidate model for learning-based anaphora resolution

Computational Linguistics

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 327-356

  Yang, Xiaofeng ^a,c   Su, Jian ^a,c   Tan, Chew Lim ^b,c  

^a Institute for Infocomm Research

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^c NONE   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANAPHORA RESOLUTION; AUTOMATIC CONTENT; CANDIDATE MODELS; CO-REFERENCE RESOLUTIONS; DIFFERENT DOMAINS; LEARNING MODELS; PREFERENCE RELATIONSHIPS; PRONOMINAL ANAPHORA RESOLUTION;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 50849090285     PISSN: 08912017     EISSN: 15309312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/coli.2008.07-004-R2-06-57     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Aone, Ghinatsu and Scott W. Bennett. 1995. Evaluating automated and manual acquisition of anaphora resolution strategies. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 122-129, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
2. Berger, Adam L., Stephen A. Della Pietra, and Vincent J. Della Pietra. 1996. A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing. Computational Linguistics, 22(1):39-71.
3. Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Foris, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
4. Clark, Herber H. and C. J. Sengul. 1979. In search of referents for noun phrases and pronouns. Memory and Cognition, 7:35-41.
5. Connolly, Dennis, John D. Burger, and David S. Day, 1997. A machine learning approach to anaphoric reference. In New Methods in Language Processing, pages 133-144, Taylor and Francis, Bristol, Pennsylvania.
6. Crawley, Rosalind A., Rosemary J. Stevenson, and David Kleinman. 1990. The use of heuristic strategies in the interpretation of pronouns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 19:245-264.
7. Denis, Pascal and Jason Baldridge. 2007. A ranking approach to pronoun resolution. In Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 1588-1593, Hyderabad, India.
8. Garnham, Alan, 2001. Mental Models and the Interpretation of Anaphora. Psychology Press Ltd., Hove, East Sussex, UK.
9. Ge, Niyu, John Hale, and Eugene Charniak. 1998. A statistical approach to anaphora resolution. In Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Very Large Corpora, pages 161-171, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
10. Gernsbacher, Morton A. and David Hargreaves. 1988. Accessing sentence participants: The advantage of first mention. Journal of Memory and Language, 27:699-717.
11. Grober, Ellen H., William Beardsley, and Alfonso Caramazza. 1978. Parallel function in pronoun assignment. Cognition, 6:117-133.
12. Grosz, Barbara J., Aravind K. Joshi, and Scott Weinstein. 1995. Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2):203-225.
13. Hobbs, Jerry. 1978. Resolving pronoun references. Lingua, 44:339-352.
14. Iida, Ryu, Kentaro Inui, Hiroya Takamura, and Yuji Matsumoto. 2003. Incorporating contextual cues in trainable models for coreference resolution. In Proceedings of the 10th Conference of EACL, Workshop "The Computational Treatment of Anaphora," pages 23-30, Budapest, Hungary.
15. Joachims, Thorsten. 2002. Optimizing search engines using clickthrough data. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD), pages 133-142, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
16. Jurafsky, Daniel and James H. Martin. 2000. Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and Speech Recognition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
17. Kehler, Andrew. 1997. Probabilistic coreference in information extraction. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 163-173, Providence, Rhode Island.
18. Kehler, Andrew, Douglas Appelt, Lara Taylor, and Aleksandr Simma. 2004. The (non)utility of predicate-argument frequencies for pronoun interpretation. In Proceedings of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics annual meeting (NAACL), pages 289-296, Boston, MA.
19. Lappin, Shalom and Herbert J. Leass. 1994. An algorithm for pronominal anaphora resolution. Computational Linguistics, 20(4):525-561.
20. Luo, Xiaogiang, Abe Ittycheriah, Hongyan Jing, Nanda Kambhatla, and Salim Roukos. 2004. A mention-synchronous coreference resolution algorithm based on the bell tree. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 135-142, Barcelona, Spain.
21. McCarthy, Joseph F. and Wendy G. Lehnert. 1995. Using decision trees for coreference resolution. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligences (IJCAI), pages 1050-1055, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
22. McEnery, A., I. Tanaka, and S. Botley. 1997. Corpus annotation and reference resolution. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Operational Factors in Practical Robust Anaphora Resolution for Unrestricted Texts, pages 67-74, Madrid, Spain.
23. Ng, Hwee Tou, Yu Zhou, Robert Dale, and Mary Gardiner. 2005. Machine learning approach to identification and resolution of one-anaphora. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 1105-1110, Edinburgh, Scotland.
24. Ng, Vincent. 2005. Machine learning for coreference resolution: From local classification to global ranking. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 157-164, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
25. Ng, Vincent and Claire Cardie. 2002a. Combining sample selection and error-driven pruning for machine learning of coreference rules. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 55-62, Philadelphia, PA.
26. Ng, Vincent and Claire Cardie. 2002b. Improving machine learning approaches to coreference resolution. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 104-111, Philadelphia, PA.
27. Preiss, Judita. 2001. Machine learning for anaphora resolution. Technical Report CS-01-10, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England.
28. Quinlan, J. Ross. 1993, C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, CA.
29. Soon, Wee Meng, Hwee Tou Ng, and Daniel Chung Yong Lim. 2001. A machine learning approach to coreference resolution of noun phrases. Computational Linguistics, 27(4):521-544.
30. Stevenson, Rosemary J., Alexander W. R. Nelson, and Keith Stenning. 1995. The role of parallelism in strategies of pronoun comprehension. Language and Speech, 29:393-418.
31. Strube, Michael and Christoph Mueller. 2003. A machine learning approach to pronoun resolution in spoken dialogue. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 168-175, Sapporo, Japan.
32. Vapnik, Vladimir N. 1995. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
33. Vilain, Marc, John Burger, John Aberdeen, Dennis Connolly, and Lynette Hirschman. 1995. A model-theoretic coreference scoring scheme. In Proceedings of the Sixth Message Understanding Conference (MUC-6), pages 45-52, San Francisco, CA.
34. Wilks, Yorick. 1973. Preference Semantics. Stanford AI Laboratory Memo AIM-206. Stanford University.
35. Winograd, Terry. 1972. Understanding Natural Language. Academic Press, New York.
36. Yang, Xiaofeng, Jian Su, and Chew Lim Tan. 2005. Improving pronoun resolution using statistics-based semantic compatibility information. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 165-172, Ann Arbor, MI.
37. Zhou, Guodong and Jian Su. 2000. Error-driven HMM-based chunk tagger with context-dependent lexicon. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Very Large Corpora, pages 71-79, Hong Kong.
38. Zhou, Guodong and Jian Su. 2002. Named Entity recognition using a HMM-based chunk tagger. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 473-480, Philadelphia, PA.