Sentence compression as tree transduction

Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research

Volumn 34, Issue , 2009, Pages 637-674

  Cohn, Trevor ^a   Lapata, Mirella ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BACTERIOPHAGES;

LARGE MARGINS; LOCAL DISTORTION; SENTENCE COMPRESSION; STATE OF THE ART; TRANSDUCTION METHOD; TREE SUBSTITUTION GRAMMARS; TREE TOPOLOGY;

TOPOLOGY;

EID: 77956315873     PISSN: 10769757     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1613/jair.2655     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Aho, A. V., & Ullman, J. D. (1969). Syntax directed translations and the pushdown assembler. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 3, 37–56.
2. Alshawi, H., Bangalore, S., & Douglas, S. (2000). Learning dependency translation models as collections of finite state head transducers. Computational Linguistics, 26(1), 45–60.
3. Berger, A. L., Pietra, S. A. D., & Pietra, V. J. D. (1996). A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing. Computational Linguistics, 22(1), 39–71.
4. Bikel, D. (2002). Design of a multi-lingual, parallel-processing statistical parsing engine. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Human Language Technology Research, pp. 24–27, San Diego, CA.
5. Briscoe, E. J., & Carroll, J. (2002). Robust accurate statistical annotation of general text. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 1499–1504, Las Palmas, Gran Canaria.
6. Carroll, J., Minnen, G., Pearce, D., Canning, Y., Devlin, S., & Tait, J. (1999). Simplifying text for language impaired readers. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 269–270, Bergen, Norway.
7. Chandrasekar, R., & Srinivas, C. D. B. (1996). Motivations and methods for text simplification. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 1041–1044, Copenhagen, Danemark.
8. Chiang, D. (2007). Hierarchical phrase-based translation. Computational Linguistics, 33(2), 201–228.
9. Clarke, J., & Lapata, M. (2006). Models for sentence compression: A comparison across domains, training requirements and evaluation measures. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 377–384, Sydney, Australia.
10. Clarke, J., & Lapata, M. (2008). Global inference for sentence compression: An integer linear programming approach. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 31, 399–429.
11. Cohn, T., & Lapata, M. (2008). Sentence compression beyond word deletion. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 137–144, Manchester, UK.
12. Collins, M. (2002). Discriminative training methods for hidden Markov models: theory and experiments with perceptron algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 1–8, Morristown, NJ.
13. Collins, M. J. (1999). Head-driven statistical models for natural language parsing. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
14. Crammer, K., & Singer, Y. (2003). Ultraconservative online algorithms for multiclass problems. Machine Learning, 3, 951–999.
15. Daumé III, H., & Marcu, D. (2002). A noisy-channel model for document compression. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of thev Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 449–456, Philadelphia, PA.
16. Eisner, J. (2003). Learning non-isomorphic tree mappings for machine translation. In The Companion Volume to the Proceedings of 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 205–208, Sapporo, Japan.
17. Galley, M., Hopkins, M., Knight, K., & Marcu, D. (2004). What’s in a translation rule?. In Proceedings of the 2004 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 273–280, Boston, MA.
18. Galley, M., & McKeown, K. (2007). Lexicalized Markov grammars for sentence compression. In Proceedings of Human Language Technologies 2007: The Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 180–187, Rochester, NY.
19. Grael, J., & Knight, K. (2004). Training tree transducers. In Proceedings of the 2004 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 105–112, Boston, MA.
20. Hermjakob, U., Echihabi, A., & Marcu, D. (2002). Natural language based reformulation resource and wide exploitation for question answering. In Proceedings of 11th Text Retrieval Conference, Gaithersburg, MD.
21. Hori, C., & Furui, S. (2004). Speech summarization: an approach through word extraction and a method for evaluation. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, E87-D(1), 15–25.
22. Jing, H. (2000). Sentence reduction for automatic text summarization. In Proceedings of the 6th Applied Natural Language Processing Conference, pp. 310–315, Seattle, WA.
23. Joachims, T. (2005). A support vector method for multivariate performance measures. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 377–384, Bonn, Germany.
24. Kaji, N., Okamoto, M., & Kurohashi, S. (2004). Paraphrasing predicates from written language to spoken language using the web. In Proceedings of the 2004 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 241–248, Boston, MA.
25. Knight, K. (1999). Decoding complexity in word-replacement translation models. Computational Linguistics, 25(4), 607–615.
26. Knight, K., & Marcu, D. (2002). Summarization beyond sentence extraction: a probabilistic approach to sentence compression. Artificial Intelligence, 139(1), 91–107.
27. Lin, D., & Pantel, P. (2001). Discovery of inference rules for question answering. Natural Language Engineering, 7(4), 342–360.
28. McDonald, R. (2006). Discriminative sentence compression with soft syntactic constraints. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 297–304, Trento, Italy.
29. Nguyen, M. L., Horiguchi, S., Shimazu, A., & Ho, B. T. (2004). Example-based sentence reduction using the hidden markov model. ACM Transactions on Asian Language Information Processing, 3(2), 146–158.
30. Och, F. J., & Ney, H. (2004). The alignment template approach to statistical machine translation. Computational Linguistics, 30(4), 417–449.
31. Papineni, K., Roukos, S., Ward, T., & Zhu, W.-J. (2002). BLEU: a method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of thev Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 311–318, Philadelphia, PA.
32. Petrov, S., Barrett, L., Thibaux, R., & Klein, D. (2006). Learning accurate, compact, and interpretable tree annotation. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 433–440, Sydney, Australia.
33. Riezler, S., King, T. H., Crouch, R., & Zaenen, A. (2003). Statistical sentence condensation using ambiguity packing and stochastic disambiguation methods for lexical-functional grammar. In Proceedings of the 2003 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 118–125, Edmonton, Canada.
34. Shieber, S., & Schabes, Y. (1990). Synchronous tree-adjoining grammars. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 253–258, Helsinki, Finland.
35. Stolcke, A. (2002). SRILM – an extensible language modeling toolkit. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Denver, CO.
36. Tsochantaridis, I., Joachims, T., Hofmann, T., & Altun, Y. (2005). Large margin methods for structured and interdependent output variables. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 6, 1453–1484.
37. Turner, J., & Charniak, E. (2005). Supervised and unsupervised learning for sentence compression. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 290–297, Ann Arbor, MI.
38. Vandeghinste, V., & Pan, Y. (2004). Sentence compression for automated subtitling: A hybrid approach. In Text Summarization Branches Out: Proceedings of the ACL-04 Workshop, pp. 89–95, Barcelona, Spain.
39. Wu, D. (1997). Stochastic inversion transduction grammars and bilingual parsing of parallel corpora. Computational Linguistics, 23(3), 377–404.
40. Yamada, K., & Knight, K. (2001). A syntax-based statistical translation model. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 523–530, Toulouse, France.