KNACK-2002: A richly annotated corpus of Dutch written text

Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2006

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 1432-1437

  Hoste, Véronique ^a   De Pauw, Guy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SEMANTICS;

DATA SET; GOLD STANDARDS; NAMED ENTITIES; PART-OF-SPEECH TAGS; SEMANTIC LEVELS; WORD LEVEL; WRITTEN TEXTS;

SYNTACTICS;

EID: 84455187216     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. R. H. Baayen, R. Piepenbrock, and H. van Rijn. 1993. The CELEX lexical data base on CD-ROM. Linguistic Data Consortium, Philadelphia, PA.
2. G. Bouma. 2003. Doing Dutch pronouns automatically in optimality theory. In Proceedings of the EACL 2003 Workshop on The Computational Treatment of Anaphora.
3. Thorsten Brants. 2000. Tnt - a statistical part-of-speech tagger. In Proceedings of the Sixth Applied Natural Language Processing Conference ANLP-2000, Seattle, WA.
4. S Canisius and A. van den Bosch. 2004. A memory-based shallow parser for spoken Dutch. In Selected papers from the Thirteenth Computational Linguistics in the Netherlands Meeting, pages 31-45.
5. W. Daelemans, J. Zavrel, P. Berck, and S. Gillis. 1996. Mbt: A memory-based part of speech tagger generator. In Proceedings of the 4th ACL/SIGDAT Workshop on Very Large Corpora, pages 14-27.
6. W. Daelemans, J. Zavrel, A. van den Bosch, and K. van der Sloot. 2003. Memory based tagger, version 2.0, reference guide. Technical Report ILK Technical Report-ILK 03-13, Tilburg University.
7. S. Davies, M. Poesio, F. Bruneseaux, and L. Romary. 1998. Annotating coreference in dialogues: Proposal for a scheme for mate. http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/poe-sio/MATE/anno-manual.htm.
8. Fien De Meulder, Walter Daelemans, and Véronique Hoste. 2002. A named entity recognition system for Dutch. In Computational Linguistics in the Netherlands 2001, Selected Papers from the Twelfth CLIN Meeting, Amsterdam, pages 77-88, New York. Rodopi.
9. G. De Pauw, T. Laureys, W. Daelemans, and H. Van hamme. 2004. A comparison of two different approaches to morphological analysis of Dutch. In Proceedings of the Seventh Meeting of the ACL Special Interest Group in Computational Phonology, pages 62-69, Barcelona, Spain.
10. K. Demuynck, T. Laureys, D. Van Compernolle, and H. Van hamme. 2003. FLaVoR: Flexible architecture for lvcsr. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, pages 1973-1976, Geneva, Switzerland.
11. L. Hirschman and N. Chinchor. 1998. Muc-7 coreference task definition. version 3.0. In Proceedings of the Seventh Message Understanding Conference (MUC-7).
12. L. Hirschman, P. Robinson, J. Burger, and M. Vilain. 1997. Automating coreference: The role of annotated training data. In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Applying Machine Learning to Discourse Processing.
13. G. Hirst. 1981. Anaphora in natural language understanding: A survey. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 119. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York.
14. V Hoste. 2005. Optimization Issues in Machine Learning of Coreference Resolution. Ph.D. thesis, University of Antwerp.
15. R. Kibble. 2000. Coreference annotation: Whither? In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2000), pages 1281-1286.
16. E. Marsi, M. Reynaert, W Daelemans A. van den Bosch, and V Hoste. 2003. Learning to predict pitch accents and prosodic boundaries in Dutch. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 489-496, Sapporo, Japan.
17. J. McCarthy. 1996. A Trainable Approach to Coreference Resolution for Information Extraction. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.
18. MUC-6. 1995. Coreference task definition. version 2.3. In Proceedings of the Sixth Message Understanding Conference (MUC-6), pages 335-344.
19. MUC-7. 1998. Muc-7 coreference task definition. version 3.0. In Proceedings of the Seventh Message Understanding Conference (MUC-7).
20. N Oostdijk. 2000. The spoken Dutch corpus. overview and first evaluation. In Proceedings of LREC-2000 (Second International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation), pages Vol. II: 887-894.
21. H.J.A op den Akker, M. Hospers, D. Lie, E. Kroezen, and A. Nijholt. 2002. A rule-based reference resolution method for Dutch discourse. In Proceedings 2002 Symposium on Reference Resolution in Natural Language Processing, pages 59-66.
22. A. Ratnaparkhi. 1996. A maximum entropy part-of-speech tagger. In Proc. of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, May 17-18, 1996, University of Pennsylvania.
23. K. van Deemter and R. Kibble. 2000. On coreferring: Coreference in muc and related annotation schemes. Computational Linguistics, 26(4):629-637.
24. Frank Van Eynde, Jakub Zavrel, and Walter Daelemans. 2000. Part of speech tagging and lemmatisation for the spoken Dutch corpus. In Proceedings of LREC-2000. Athens, Greece.