Treebank annotation schemes and parser evaluation for German

EMNLP-CoNLL 2007 - Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 630-639

  Rehbe, Ines ^a   Van Genabith, Josef ^a,b  

^a DUBLIN CITY UNIVERSITY   (Ireland)

^b Smarter Cities Technology Centre   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANNOTATION SCHEME; ENCODING SCHEMES; TREEBANKS;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; DATA STRUCTURES; ENCODING (SYMBOLS); EXPERIMENTS;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 80053343301     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. Black, E., S. P. Abney, D. Flickinger, C. Gdaniec, R. Grishman, P. Harrison, D. Hindle, R. Ingria, F. Jelinek, J. Klavans, M. Liberman, M. P. Marcus, S. Roukos, B. Santorini, and T. Strzalkowski. 1991. A procedure for quantitatively comparing the syntactic coverage of English grammars. In Proceedings DARPA Speech and Natural Language Workshop, Pacific Grove, CA, pp. 306-311.
2. Brants, Sabine, and Silvia Hansen. 2002. Developments in the TIGER Annotation Scheme and their Realization in the Corpus. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2002), pp. 1643-1649 Las Palmas.
3. Briscoe, E. J., J. A. Carroll, and A. Copestake. 2002. Relational evaluation schemes. In Proceedings Workshop'Beyond Parseval - towards improved evaluation measures for parsing systems', 3rd International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 4-38. Las Palmas, Canary Islands.
4. Carroll, J., E. Briscoe and A. Sanfilippo. 1998. Parser evaluation: a survey and a new proposal. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Granada, Spain. 447-454.
5. Dipper, S., T. Brants, W. Lezius, O. Plaehn, and G. Smith. 2001. The TIGER Treebank. In Third Workshop on Linguistically Interpreted Corpora LINC-2001, Leuven, Belgium.
6. Drach, Erich. 1937. Grundgedanken der Deutschen Satzlehre. Frankfurt/M.
7. Dubey, A., and F. Keller. 2003. Probabilistic parsing for German using sisterhead dependencies. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Sapporo, Japan.
8. Höhle, Tilman. 1998. Der Begriff. Mittelfeld., Anmerkungen über die Theorie der topologischen Felder. In Akten des Siebten Internationalen Germansitenkongresses 1985, pages 329-340, Göttingen, Germany.
9. Kübler, Sandra, and Heike Telljohann. 2002. Towards a Dependency-Oriented Evaluation for Partial Parsing. In Proceedings of Beyond PARSEVAL. Towards Improved Evaluation Measures for Parsing Systems (LREC 2002 Workshop), Las Palmas, Gran Canaria, June 2002.
10. Lin, Dekang. 1998. A dependency-based method for evaluating broad-coverage parsers. Natural Language Engineering, 1998.
11. Kübler, Sandra. 2005. How Do Treebank Annotation Schemes Influence Parsing Results? Or How Not to Compare Apples And Oranges. In Proceedings of FANLP 2005), Borovets, Bulgaria, September 2005.
12. Kübler, Sandra, Erhard Hinrichs, and Wolfgang Maier. 2006. Is it Really that Difficult to Parse German? In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2006), Sydney, Australia, July 2006.
13. Levenshtein, V. I. 1966. Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics - Doklady, 10.707-10 (translation of Russian original published in 1965).
14. Maier, Wolfgang. 2006. Annotation Schemes and their Influence on Parsing Results. In Proceedings of the COLING/ACL 2006 Student Research Workshop), Sydney, Australia, July 2006.
15. Marcus, M., G. Kim, M. A. Marcinkiewicz, R. MacIntyre, M. Ferguson, K. Katz and B. Schasberger. 1994. The Penn Treebank: Annotating Predicate Argument Structure. In Proceedings of the ARPA Human Language Technology Workshop, Princeton, NJ.
16. Sampson, Geoffrey, and Anna Babarczy. 2003. A test of the leaf-ancestor metric for parse accuracy. Natural Language Engineering, 9 (4):365-380.
17. Schmid, Helmut. 2000. LoPar: Design and Implementation. Arbeitspapiere des Sonderforschungsbereiches 340, No. 149, IMS Stuttgart, July 2000.
18. Schmid, Helmut. 2004. Efficient Parsing of Highly Ambiguous Context-Free Grammars with Bit Vectors. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 2004), Geneva, Switzerland.
19. Sekine, S. and M. J. Collins. 1997. The evalb software. http://nlp.cs.nyu.edu/evalb/.
20. Skut, Wojciech, Brigitte Krann, Thorsten Brants, and Hans Uszkoreit. 1997. An annotation scheme for free word order languages. In Proceedings of ANLP 1997, Washington, D.C.
21. Telljohann, Heike, Erhard W. Hinrichs, Sandra Kübler, and Heike Zinsmeister. 2005. Stylebook for the Tübingen Treebank of Written German (TüBa- D/Z). Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft, Universität Tübingen, Germany.
22. Schiller, Anne, Simone Teufel, and Christine Thielen. 1995. Guidelines fr das Tagging deutscher Textcorpora mit STTS. Technical Report, IMS-CL, University Stuttgart, 1995.