Content selection from an ontology-based knowledge base for the generation of football summaries

ENLG 2011 - 13th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 72-81

  Bouayad Agha, Nadjet ^a   Casamayor, Gerard ^a   Wanner, Leo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT POMPEU FABRA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA ASSESSMENT; DOMAIN ONTOLOGIES; INFERENCE RULES; KNOWLEDGE BASE; NATURAL LANGUAGE GENERATION; NUMERICAL DATA; ONTOLOGY-BASED; SEMANTIC RELATIONS; TEXT PLANNING; USER MODELS;

SEMANTICS; SPORTS;

KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS;

EID: 84859955301     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. Regina Barzilay and Mirella Lapata. 2005. Collective Content Selection for Concept-to-Text Generation. Proceedings of the Joint Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing Conferences (HLT/EMNLP-2005) Vancouver, Canada.
2. John A. Bateman, Robert T. Kasper, Johanna D. Moore, and Richard A. Whitney 1990 A General Organization of Knowledge for Natural Language Processing: the Penman Upper Model Technical Report. USC/Information Sciences Institute, Marina del Rey, California.
3. John A. Bateman, Renate Henschel, and Fabio Rinaldi 1995 Generalized Upper Model 2.0: documentation. Technical Report. GMD/Institut für Integrierte Publikations- und Informationssysteme, Darmstadt, Germany.
4. Kalina Bontcheva and Yorick Wilks. 2004. Automatic Report Generation from Ontologies: the MIAKT approach. Proceedings of the Nineth International Conference on Applications of Natural Language to Information Systems (NLDB'2004). Manchester, UK.
5. Nadjet Bouayad-Agha, Gerard Casamayor, Leo Wanner, Fernando Díez, and Sergio López Hernández. 2011. FootbOWL: Using a generic ontology of football competition for planning match summaries. Proceedings of the 8th Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC2011). Heraklion, Greece.
6. Seniz Demir, Sandra Carberry and Kathleen F. McCoy. 2010. A Discourse-Aware Graph-Based Content-Selection Framework. Proceedings of the International Language Generation Conference. Sweden.
7. Pablo A. Duboue and Kathleen R. McKeown. 2003. Statistical Acquisition of Content Selection Rules for Natural Language Generation. Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP). Sapporo, Japan.
8. Renate Henschel 1992, 1993. Merging the English and German Upper Models. Technical Report. GMD/Institut für Integrierte Publikations- und Informationssysteme, Darmstadt, Germany.
9. Eduard Hovy. 1993 Automated discourse generation using discourse relations. Artificial Intelligence. 63, 341. 385.
10. PamelaW. Jordan and Marilyn A.Walker 2005 Learning content selection rules for generating object descriptions in dialogue Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 24, 157-194.
11. Colin Kelly, Ann Copestake, and Nikiforos Karamanis. 2009 Investigating content selection for language generation using machine learning. Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation. 130-137.
12. Richard Kittredge, Tanya Korelsky, and Owen Rambow. 1991. On the need for domain communication knowledge. Computational Intelligence 7(4):305-314.
13. Chris Mellish and Jeff Z. Pan. 2008 Language Directed Inference from Ontologies. Artificial Intelligence. 172(10):1285-1315.
14. Johanna D. Moore and Cécile L. Paris. 1993 Planning texts for advisory dialogs: capturing intentional and rhetorical information. Computational Linguistics. 19(4), 651-694.
15. Mick ODonnell, Chris Mellish, Jon Oberlander, and Alistair Knott. 2001. ILEX: an architecture for a dynamic hypertext generation system. Natural Language Engineering. 7(3):225-250.
16. François Portet, Ehud Reiter, Albert Gatt, Jim Hunter, Somayajulu Sripada, Yvonne Freer and Cindy Sykes. 2009. Automatic generation of textual summaries from neonatal intensive care data. Artificial Intelligence 173(7-8): 789-816.
17. Richard Power and Allan Third. 2010. Expressing OWL axioms by English sentences: dubious in theory, feasible in practice. Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 2010). Beijing, China.
18. Ehud Reiter 2007. An Architecture for Data-to-Text Systems. Proceedings of the 11th European Natural Language Generation Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany. page 97-104.
19. Robert E. Schapire and Yoram Singer 2000 BoosTexter: A boosting-based system for text categorization. Machine Learning 39(2/3):135-168.
20. LeoWanner, Bernd Bohnet, Nadjet Bouayad-Agha, Francois Lareau, and Daniel Nicklaß. 2010 MARQUIS: Generation of User-Tailored Multilingual Air Quality Bulletins. Applied Artificial Intelligence. 24(10):914-952.
21. Graham Wilcock 2003 Talking owls: Towards an ontology verbalizer. Proceedings of the Human Language Technology for the Semantic Web and Web Services, ISWC-2003. 109-112. Sanibel Island, Florida.
22. Jin Yu, Ehud Reiter and Jim Hunter. 2007 Choosing the content of textual summaries of large time-series data sets. Natural Language Engineering. 13:25-49.