On the Role of Morphosyntactic Features in Hindi Dependency Parsing

1st Workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically-Rich Languages, SPMRL 2010 - Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 94-102

  Ambati, Bharat Ram ^a   Husain, Samar ^a   Nivre, Joakim ^b   Sangal, Rajeev ^a  

^a INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY   (India)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA DRIVEN; DEPENDENCY PARSING; LINGUISTIC FEATURES; PAPER ANALYSIS; PERCENTAGE POINTS; STATE OF THE ART; TWO-STATE;

EID: 84875510889     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (33)

1. B. R. Ambati, P. Gadde, and K. Jindal. 2009a. Experiments in Indian Language Dependency Parsing. Proc. of ICON09 NLP Tools Contest: Indian Language Dependency Parsing, 32-37.
2. B. R. Ambati, P. Gade, C. GSK and S. Husain. 2009b. Effect of Minimal Semantics on Dependency Parsing. Proc. of RANLP Student Research Workshop.
3. R. Begum, S. Husain, A. Dhwaj, D. Sharma, L. Bai, and R. Sangal. 2008. Dependency annotation scheme for Indian languages. Proc. of IJCNLP.
4. A. Bharati, V. Chaitanya and R. Sangal. 1995. Natural Language Processing: A Paninian Perspective, Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi.
5. A. Bharati, S. Husain, B. Ambati, S. Jain, D. Sharma, and R. Sangal. 2008. Two semantic features make all the difference in parsing accuracy. Proc. of ICON.
6. A. Bharati, R. Sangal, D. M. Sharma and L. Bai. 2006. AnnCorra: Annotating Corpora Guidelines for POS and Chunk Annotation for Indian Languages. Technical Report (TR-LTRC-31), LTRC, IIIT-Hyderabad.
7. A. Bharati, D. M. Sharma, S. Husain, L. Bai, R. Begam and R. Sangal. 2009a. AnnCorra: TreeBanks for Indian Languages, Guidelines for Annotating Hindi TreeBank. http://ltrc.iiit.ac.in/MachineTrans/research/tb/DSguidelines/DS-guidelines-ver2-28-05-09.pdf
8. A. Bharati, S. Husain, D. M. Sharma and R. Sangal. 2009b. Two stage constraint based hybrid approach to free word order language dependency parsing. In Proc. of IWPT.
9. R. Bhatt, B. Narasimhan, M. Palmer, O. Rambow, D. M. Sharma and F. Xia. 2009. Multi-Representational and Multi-Layered Treebank for Hindi/Urdu. Proc. of the Third LAW at ACL-IJCNLP, 186-189.
10. M. Butt. 1995. The Structure of Complex Predicates in Urdu. CSLI Publications.
11. G. Eryigit, J. Nivre, and K. Oflazer. 2008. Dependency Parsing of Turkish. Computational Linguistics 34(3), 357-389.
12. P. Gadde, K. Jindal, S. Husain, D. M. Sharma, and R. Sangal. 2010. Improving Data Driven Dependency Parsing using Clausal Information. Proc. of NAACL-HLT.
13. Y. Goldberg and M. Elhadad. 2009. Hebrew Dependency Parsing: Initial Results. Proc. of IWPT, 129-133.
14. E. Hajicova. 1998. Prague Dependency Treebank: From Analytic to Tectogrammatical Annotation. Proc. of TSD.
15. 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. Proc. of EMNLP-CoNLL, 933-939.
16. S. Husain. 2009. Dependency Parsers for Indian Languages. Proc. of ICON09 NLP Tools Contest: Indian Language Dependency Parsing.
17. S. Husain, P. Gadde, B. Ambati, D. M. Sharma and R. Sangal. 2009. A modular cascaded approach to complete parsing. Proc. of the COLIPS International Conference on Asian Language Processing.
18. P. Mannem, H. Chaudhry, and A. Bharati. 2009a. Insights into non-projectivity in Hindi. Proc. of ACL-IJCNLP Student Research Workshop.
19. P. Mannem, A. Abhilash and A. Bharati. 2009b. LTAGspinal Treebank and Parser for Hindi. Proceedings of International Conference on NLP, Hyderabad. 2009.
20. R. McDonald, K. Lerman, and F. Pereira. 2006. Multilingual dependency analysis with a two-stage discriminative parser. Proc. of CoNLL, 216-220.
21. R. McDonald and J. Nivre. 2007. Characterizing the errors of data-driven dependency parsing models. Proc. of EMNLP-CoNLL, 122-131.
22. I. A. Mel'Cuk. 1988. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice, State University Press of New York.
23. J. Nilsson, J. Nivre and J. Hall. 2007. Generalizing Tree Transformations for Inductive Dependency Parsing. Proc. of ACL, 968-975.
24. J. Nivre. 2008. Algorithms for Deterministic Incremental Dependency Parsing. Computational Linguistics 34(4), 513-553.
25. J. Nivre and R. McDonald. 2008. Integrating graph-based and transition-based dependency parsers. In Proceedings of ACL-HLT, pp. 950-958.
26. J. Nivre. 2009a. Non-Projective Dependency Parsing in Expected Linear Time. Proc. of ACL-IJCNLP, 351-359.
27. J. Nivre. 2009b. Parsing Indian Languages with MaltParser. Proc. of ICON09 NLP Tools Contest: Indian Language Dependency Parsing, 12-18.
28. J. Nivre, J. Hall, S. Kubler, R. McDonald, J. Nilsson, S. Riedel and D. Yuret. 2007a. The CoNLL 2007 Shared Task on Dependency Parsing. Proc. of EMNLP/CoNLL, 915-932.
29. J. Nivre, J. Hall, J. Nilsson, A. Chanev, G. Eryigit, S. Kübler, S. Marinov and E Marsi. 2007b. MaltParser: A language-independent system for data-driven dependency parsing. NLE, 13(2), 95-135.
30. L. Øvrelid. 2008. Argument Differentiation. Soft constraints and data-driven models. PhD Thesis, University of Gothenburg.
31. D. Seddah, M. Candito and B. Crabbé. 2009. Cross parser evaluation: a French Treebanks study. Proc. of IWPT, 150-161.
32. R. Tsarfaty and K. Sima'an. 2008. Relational-Realizational Parsing. Proc. of CoLing, 889-896.
33. A. Vaidya, S. Husain, P. Mannem, and D. M. Sharma. 2009. A karaka-based dependency annotation scheme for English. Proc. of CICLing, 41-52.