Progress on multi-lingual named entity annotation guidelines using RDF(S)

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2002

Volumn , Issue , 2002, Pages 2074-2081

  Collier, Nigel ^a   Takeuchi, Koichi ^a   Nobata, Chikashi ^b   Fukumoto, Junichi ^c   Ogata, Norihiro ^d  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATICS   (Japan)

^b Kansai Advanced Research Center   (Japan)

^c RITSUMEIKAN UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^d OSAKA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; ONTOLOGY;

DATA FILES; INFORMATION ACCESS; NAMED ENTITIES; SEMANTIC STRUCTURES; TECHNICAL TERMS;

SEMANTIC WEB;

EID: 8344290598     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. T. Berners-Lee, M. Fischetti, and M. Dertouzos. (1999). Weaving the Web: The Original Design and Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web. Harper, San Francisco, September. ISBN: 0062515861.
2. B. de Besse, B. Nkwenti-Azeh, and J. C. Sager. (1997). Glossary of terms used in terminology. Terminology 4(1), pages 117-156. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
3. D. Brickley and R.V. Guha (eds.), (2000). Resource Description Framework (RDF) Schema Specification 1.0. CR, W3C, Mar. 2000. http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CRrdf-schema-20000327.
4. N. Chinchor and G. Dungca. (1995). Four scorers and seven years ago: The scoring methods for MUC-6. In Proceedings of the Sixth Message Understanding Conference (MUC-5), Baltimore, Maryland, USA., pages 33-38. Morgan Kaufmann, November.
5. N. Chinchor, editor. (1997). MUC-7 Named Entity Task Definition, Version 3.5, This document should be available from Nancy Chinchor chinchor@gso.saic.com, September 17th. DARPA.
6. N. Collier, K. Takeuchi, K. Tsuji, G. Jones, J. Fukumoto, N. Ogata, C. Nobata, and K. Ono. (2001). The PIA project: Learning to semantically annotate texts form an ontology and XML-instance data. In position paper proceedings of the International Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS), Stanford University, California, USA, pages 8-9, 30th July - 1st August.
7. N. Collier and K. Takeuchi, (2002). PIA-Core: Semantic Annotation through Example -based Learning. In proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2002), Las Palmas, Spain, 29-31 May.
8. DeRose, S., Maler, E. and Daniel, R. (eds), 2002. XML Pointer Language (XPointer) Version 1.0, W3C Candidate Recommendation 11 September 2001. Available from http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr/.
9. Dublin Core, (1999). Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1: Reference Description. Technical report, Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, Jul. 1999. http://purl.org/DC/documents/rec-dces-19990702.htm.
10. N. Fridman Noy, R. W. Fergerson, and M. A. Musen. (2000). The knowledge model of Protégé-2000: combining interoperability and flexibility. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW'2000), Juan-les-Pins, France, pages 1-20, 2000.
11. R. Grishman (1998), TIPSTER Text Architecture Design Version 3.1, NIST Technical Report of the TIPSTER Project, 7th October 1998.
12. S. Handschuh, S. Staab, and A. Maedche. (2001). CREAM -creating relational metadata with a component-based, ontology-driven annotation framework. In First International Conference on Knowledge Capture (K-CAP 2001), Victoria, B.C., Canada, 21 - 23 October.
13. N. Ide and G. Priest-Dorman, editors. (2000). Corpus Encoding Standard. Number CES 1, Version 1.5. Expert Advisory Group on Language Engineering Standards (EAGLES), http://www.cs.vassar.edu/CES/, March.
14. Kahan, J., Koivunen, M., Prud'Hommeaux, E. and Swick, R., 2001. Annotea: An Open RDF Infrastructure for Shared Web Annotations, in proceedings of the 10th International World Wide Web Conference, Hong Kong, May 2001. http://www10.org/cdrom/papers/488/index.html.
15. A. Kehler, J. Bear, and D. Appelt. (2001). The need for accurate alignment in natural language system evaluation. Computational Linguistics, 27(2):231-248, June.
16. O. Lassila and R. Swick (eds.), (1999). Resource Description Framework (RDF) Model and Syntax Specification. Recommendation, W3C, Feb. 1999. http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax.
17. M. A. Musen, R. W. Fergerson, W. E. Grosso, N. F. Noy, M. Crubézy, and J. H. Gennari. (2000). Componentbased support for building knowledge-Acquisition systems. In Conference on Intelligent Information Processing (IIP'2000) of the International Federation for Processing World Computer Congress (WCC'2000), Beijing.
18. S. Staab, M. Erdmann, A. Maedche, and S. Decker. (2000). An extensible approach for modeling ontologies in RDF(S). In Proceedings of Workshop on the Semantic Web, held at the Fourth European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries (ECDL 2000), Lisbon, Portugal.
19. H. van Halteren, J. Zavrel, and W. Daelemans. (2000). Improving accuracy in word class tagging through the combination of machine learning systems. Computational Linguistics, 27(2):199-229, June 2001.