Effect of Minimal Semantics on Dependency Parsing

International Conference Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing, RANLP

Volumn Part F174176, Issue , 2009, Pages 1-5

  Ambati, Bharat Ram ^a   Gade, Pujitha ^a   Chaitanya, G S K ^a   Husain, Samar ^a  

^a INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY   (India)

Author keywords

Dependency parsing; Free word order language; Malt parser; Minimal semantics; MST parser

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; SYNTACTICS;

DATA DRIVEN; DEPENDENCY PARSER; DEPENDENCY PARSING; FREE WORD ORDER LANGUAGES; HYDERABAD; MALT PARSE; MINIMAL SEMANTIC; MST PARSE; STATE OF THE ART; TREEBANKS;

SEMANTICS;

EID: 84858431801     PISSN: 13138502     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. R. Begum, S. Husain, A. Dhwaj, D. Sharma, L. Bai, and R. Sangal. 2008. Dependency annotation scheme for Indian languages. In Proceedings of IJCNLP-2008.
2. A. Bharati, V. Chaitanya and R. Sangal. 1995. Natural Language Processing: A Paninian Perspective, Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi.
3. A. Bharati, S. Husain, B. Ambati, S. Jain, D. Sharma, and R. Sangal. 2008a. Two semantic features make all the difference in parsing accuracy. In Proceedings of ICON-08.
4. A. Bharati, S. Husain, D. M. Sharma, and R. Sangal. 2008b. A Two-Stage Constraint Based Dependency Parser for Free Word Order Languages. In Proceedings of the COLIPS IALP, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
5. M. Ciaramita and G. Attardi. 2007. Dependency Parsing with Second-Order Feature Maps and Annotated Semantic Information. In Proceedings of IWPT 2007.
6. Y.J. Chu and T.H. Liu. 1965. On the shortest arbores-cence of a directed graph. Science Sinica, 14:1396-1400.
7. Q. Dai, E. Chen, and L. Shi. 2009. An iterative approach for joint dependency parsing and se-mantic role labeling. In Proceedings of the 13th Con-ference on Computational Natural Language Learning(CoNLL-2009), June 4-5, Boulder, Colorado, USA.June 4-5.
8. J. Edmonds. 1967. Optimum branchings. Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, 71B:233-240.
9. J. Hall, J. Nilsson, J. Nivre, G. Eryigit, B. Megyesi, M. Nilsson and M. Saers. 2007. Single Malt or Blended? A Study in Multilingual Parser Optimization. In Proceedings of the CoNLL Shared Task Session of EMNLP-CoNLL.
10. J. Hudson, 1984. 'Why English should be taught as a second language in Aboriginal schools in the Kimberleys', pp.99-106 in Wikaru, Vol.12.
11. S. Jha, D. Narayan, P. Pande and P. A. Bhattacharyya. 2001. WordNet for Hindi. International Workshop on Lexical Resources in Natural Language Processing, Hyderabad, India, January 2001.
12. M. Marcus, B. Santorini, and M. Marcinkiewicz. (1993). Building a large annotated corpus of English: the Penn treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19:313-330.
13. R. McDonald, K. Crammer, and F. Pereira. 2005b. Online large-margin training of dependency parsers. In Proceedings of ACL. pp. 91-98.
14. R. McDonald, F. Pereira, K. Ribarov, and J. Hajic. 2005a. Non-projective dependency parsing using spanning tree algorithms. Proceedings of HLT/EMNLP, pp. 523-530.
15. I. A. Mel'Cuk. 1988. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice, State University Press of New York.
16. J. Nivre, J. Hall, S. Kubler, R. McDonald, J. Nilsson, S. Riedel and D. Yuret. 2007b. The CoNLL 2007 Shared Task on Dependency Parsing. In Proceedings of EMNLP/CoNLL-2007.
17. J. Nivre, J. Hall, J. Nilsson, A. Chanev, G. Eryigit, S. Kübler, S.Marinov and E Marsi. 2007a. MaltParser: A language-independent system for data-driven dependency parsing. Natural Language Engineering, 13(2), 95-135.
18. S. Reddy, A. Inumella, R. Sangal and S. Paul. 2009. All Words Unsupervised Semantic Category Labeling for Hindi. To be appeared in Recent
19. S. M. Shieber. 1985. Evidence against the context-freeness of natural language. In Linguistics and Philosophy, p. 8, 334-343.