Learning information status of discourse entities

COLING/ACL 2006 - EMNLP 2006: 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Proceedings of the Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 94-102

  Nissim, Malvina ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGIES   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION TREES; SYNTACTICS; TREES (MATHEMATICS);

BINARY CLASSIFICATION; DECISION TREE MODELING; HANDCRAFTED RULES; LEXICAL FEATURES; MANUAL ANNOTATION; OVERALL ACCURACIES; SYNTACTIC FEATURES; TARGET CLASS;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 80053274287     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3115/1610075.1610090     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. Mira Ariel. 1990. Accessing Noun Phrase Antecedents. Routledge, London-New York.
2. Collin F. Baker, Charles J. Fillmore, and John B. Lowe. 1998. The Berkeley FrameNet project. In Christian Boitet and Pete Whitelock, editors, Proceedings of COLING-ACL, pages 86-90.
3. Jean Carletta, Shipra Dingare, Malvina Nissim, and Tatiana Nikitina. 2004. Using the NITE XML Toolkit on the Switchboard Corpus to study syntactic choice: a case study. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC2004), Lisbon, May 2004.
4. Jean Carletta. 1996. Assessing agreement on classification tasks: the kappa statistic. Computational Linguistics, 22(2):249-254.
5. Herbert H. Clark. 1975. Bridging. In Roger Schank and Bonnie Nash-Webber, editors, Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. Jacob Cohen. 1960. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurements, 20:37-46.
7. Miriam Eckert and Michael Strube. 2001. Dialogue acts, synchronising units and anaphora resolution. Journal of Semantics, 17(1):51-89.
8. Christiane Fellbaum, editor. 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
9. Talmy Givón. 1983. Introduction. In Talmy Givón, editor, Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-language Study. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
10. J. Godfrey, E. Holliman, and J. McDaniel. 1992. SWITCHBOARD: Telephone speech corpus for research and development. In Proceedings of ICASSP-92, pages 517-520.
11. Barbara Grosz, Aravind K. Joshi, and Scott Weinstein. 1995. Centering: a framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2):203-225.
12. Eva Hajičová, Barbara Partee, and Petr Sgall. 1998. Topic-focus articulation, tripartite structures, and semantic content. In Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, volume 71. Dordrecht.
13. Eva Hajičová. 1984. Topic and focus. In Petr Sgall, editor, Contributions to Functional Syntax. Semantics and Language Comprehension (LLSEE 16), pages 189-202. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
14. M.A.K. Halliday. 1976. Notes on transitivity and theme in English. Part 2. Journal of Linguistics, 3(2):199-244.
15. th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
16. Ivana Kruijff-Korbayová and Mark Steedman. 2003. Discourse and information structure. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information, 12:249-259.
17. Knud Lambrecht. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus, and the mental representation of discourse referents. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
18. Sebastian Löbner. 1985. Definites. Journal of Semantics, 4:279-326.
19. Mitchell Marcus, Beatrice Santorini, and May Ann Marcinkiewicz. 1993. Building a large annotated corpus of english: The Penn treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19:313-330.
20. th International Conference on Computational Linguistics; Taipei, Taiwan, pages 730-736.
21. Malvina Nissim, Shipra Dingare, Jean Carletta, and Mark Steedman. 2004. An annotation scheme for information status in dialogue. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC2004), Lisbon, May 2004.
22. Oana Postolache, Ivana Kruijff-Korbayova, and Geert-Jan Kruijff. 2005. Data-driven approaches for information structure identification. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 9-16, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, October. Association for Computational Linguistics.
23. Ellen F. Prince. 1981. Toward a taxonomy of givennew information. In Peter Cole, editor, Radical Pragmatics. Academic Press, New York.
24. Ellen Prince. 1992. The ZPG letter: subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In Sandra Thompson and William Mann, editors, Discourse description: diverse analyses of a fund raising text, pages 295-325. John Benjamins, Philadelphia/Amsterdam.
25. Mark Steedman. 2000. The Syntactic Process. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
26. K. Stöber, P. Wagner, Jörg Helbig, S. Köster, D. Stall, M. Thomas, J. Blauert, W. Hess, R. Hoffmann, and H. Mangold. 2000. Speech synthesis using multilevel selection and concatenation of units from large speech corpora. In W. Wahlster, editor, Verbmobil: Foundations of Speech-to-Speech Translation, pages 519-534. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
27. Michael Strube. 1998. Never look back: An alternative to centering. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1251-1257, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
28. Olga Uryupina. 2003. High-precision identification of discourse new and unique noun phrases. In Proc. of the ACL 2003 Student Workshop, pages 80-86.
29. Enric Vallduví. 1992. The Informational Component. Garland, New York.
30. Renata Vieira and Massimo Poesio. 2000. An empirically-based system for processing definite descriptions. Computational Linguistics, 26(4).
31. Thomas Wasow. 2002. Postverbal Behavior. CSLI Publications.
32. Ian H. Witten and Eibe Frank. 2000. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques with Java Implementations. Morgan Kaufmann, San Diego, CA.