A dynamic oracle for arc-eager dependency parsing

24th International Conference on Computational Linguistics - Proceedings of COLING 2012: Technical Papers

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 959-976

  Goldberg, Yoav ^a   Nivre, Joakim ^a,b  

^a GOOGLE INC   (United States)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Dependency parsing; Oracle; Transition system

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; FORESTRY; GOLD;

DEPENDENCY PARSER; DEPENDENCY PARSING; ERROR PROPAGATION; OPTIMAL SEQUENCE; OPTIMAL TRANSITION; ORACLE; RIGHT DEPENDENCIES; TRANSITION SYSTEM;

SYNTACTICS;

COMPUTER PROGRAMS; DATA PROCESSING; OPTIMIZATION; TREES;

EID: 84876791528     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (46)

1. Aduriz, I., Aranzabe, M. J., Arriola, J. M., Atutxa, A., Díaz de Ilarraza, A., Garmendia, A., and Oronoz, M. (2003). Construction of a Basque dependency treebank. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories (TLT), pages 201-204.
2. Attardi, G. (2006). Experiments with a multilanguage non-projective dependency parser. In Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL), pages 166-170.
3. Bies, A., Mott, J., Warner, C., and Kulick, S. (2012). English web treebank. Linguistic Data Consortium, LDC2012T13.
4. Böhmová, A., Hajǐc, J., Hajǐcová, E., and Hladká, B. (2003). The Prague Dependency Treebank: A three-level annotation scenario. In Abeillé, A., editor, Treebanks: Building and Using Parsed Corpora, pages 103-127. Kluwer.
5. Bohnet, B. and Kuhn, J. (2012). The best of bothworlds - a graph-based completion model for transition-based parsers. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 77-87.
6. Chen, K., Luo, C., Chang, M., Chen, F., Chen, C., Huang, C., and Gao, Z. (2003). Sinica treebank: Design criteria, representational issues and implementation. In Abeillé, A., editor, Treebanks, pages 231-248. Kluwer.
7. Choi, J. D. and Palmer, M. (2011). Getting the most out of transition-based dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 687-692.
8. Cohen, S. B., Gómez-Rodríguez, C., and Satta, G. (2012). Elimination of spurious ambiguity in transition-based dependency parsing. Technical report.
9. Cohen, W. W. and Carvalho, V. R. (2005). Stacked sequential learning. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 671-676.
10. Covington, M. A. (2001). A fundamental algorithm for dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual ACM Southeast Conference, pages 95-102.
11. Crammer, K., Dekel, O., Keshet, J., Shalev-Shwartz, S., and Singer, Y. (2006). Online passiveaggressive algorithms. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 7:551-585.
12. Czendes, D., Csirik, J., Guimóthy, and Kocsor, A. (2005). The Szeged Treebank. Springer.
13. Daumé III, H., Langford, J., and Marcu, D. (2009). Search-based structured prediction. Machine Learning, 75:297-325.
14. Daumé III, H. and Marcu, D. (2005). Learning as search optimization: Approximate large margin methods for structured prediction. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 169-176.
15. de Marneffe, M.-C., MacCartney, B., and Manning, C. D. (2006). Generating typed dependency parses from phrase structure parses. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC).
16. Foster, J., ÇetinoÄÿlu, O., Wagner, J., and van Genabith, J. (2011). Comparing the use of edited and unedited text in parser self-training. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Parsing Technologies, pages 215-219.
17. Foster, J. and van Genabith, J. (2008). Parser evaluation and the BNC: Evaluating 4 constituency parsers with 3 metrics. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC).
18. Goldberg, Y. and Elhadad, M. (2010). An efficient algorithm for easy-first non-directional dependency parsing. In Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL HLT), pages 742-750.
19. Hajič, J., Smrž, O., Zemánek, P., Šnaidauf, J., and Beška, E. (2004). Prague Arabic Dependency Treebank: Development in data and tools. In Proceedings of the NEMLAR International Conference on Arabic Language Resources and Tools.
20. Hajič, J., Vidova Hladka, B., Panevová, J., Hajičová, E., Sgall, P., and Pajas, P. (2001). Prague Dependency Treebank 1.0. LDC, 2001T10.
21. Hall, J., Nilsson, J., Nivre, J., Eryiǧit, G., Megyesi, B., Nilsson, M., and Saers, M. (2007). Single malt or blended? A study in multilingual parser optimization. In Proceedings of the CoNLL Shared Task of EMNLP-CoNLL 2007, pages 933-939.
22. Huang, L., Fayong, S., and Guo, Y. (2012). Structured perceptron with inexact search. In Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2012 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL HLT).
23. Judge, J., Cahill, A., and van Genabith, J. (2006). Questionbank: Creating a corpus of parseannotated questions. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 497-504. Association for Computational Linguistics.
24. Kucera, H. and Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational Analysis of Present-Day American English. Brown University Press.
25. Marcus, M. P., Santorini, B., and Marcinkiewicz, M. A. (1993). Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19:313-330.
26. Martí, M. A., Taule, M., Màrquez, L., and Bertran, M. (2007). CESS-ECE: A multilingual and multilevel annotated corpus. Available for download from: http://www.lsi.upc.edu/∼mbertran/cess-ece/.
27. Martins, A. F., Das, D., Smith, N. A., and Xing, E. P. (2008). Stacking dependency parsers. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 157-166.
28. McCallum, A., Freitag, D., and Pereira, F. (2000). Maximum entropy markov models for information extraction and segmentation. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 591-598.
29. McDonald, R. and Nivre, J. (2007). Characterizing the errors of data-driven dependency parsing models. In Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL), pages 122-131.
30. Montemagni, S., Barsotti, F., Battista, M., Calzolari, N., Corazzari, O., Lenci, A., Zampolli, A., Fanciulli, F., Massetani, M., Raffaelli, R., Basili, R., Pazienza, M. T., Saracino, D., Zanzotto, F., Nana, N., Pianesi, F., and Delmonte, R. (2003). Building the Italian Syntactic-Semantic Treebank. In Abeillé, A., editor, Treebanks: Building and Using Parsed Corpora, pages 189-210. Kluwer.
31. Nivre, J. (2003). An efficient algorithm for projective dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT), pages 149-160.
32. Nivre, J. (2004). Incrementality in deterministic dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Incremental Parsing: Bringing Engineering and Cognition Together (ACL), pages 50-57.
33. Nivre, J. (2006). Inductive Dependency Parsing. Springer.
34. Nivre, J. (2008). Algorithms for deterministic incremental dependency parsing. Computational Linguistics, 34:513-553.
35. Nivre, J., Hall, J., Kübler, S., McDonald, R., Nilsson, J., Riedel, S., and Yuret, D. (2007). The CoNLL 2007 shared task on dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the CoNLL Shared Task of EMNLP-CoNLL 2007, pages 915-932.
36. Nivre, J., Hall, J., and Nilsson, J. (2004). Memory-based dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL), pages 49-56.
37. Nivre, J. and McDonald, R. (2008). Integrating graph-based and transition-based dependency parsers. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 950-958.
38. Nivre, J. and Nilsson, J. (2005). Pseudo-projective dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 99-106.
39. Oflazer, K., Say, B., Hakkani-Tür, D. Z., and Tür, G. (2003). Building a Turkish treebank. In Abeillé, A., editor, Treebanks: Building and Using Parsed Corpora, pages 261-277. Kluwer.
40. Petrov, S. and McDonald, R. (2012). Overview of the 2012 shared task on parsing the web. In Notes on the First Workshop on Syntatctic Analysis for Non-Canonical Language.
41. Prokopidis, P., Desypri, E., Koutsombogera, M., Papageorgiou, H., and Piperidis, S. (2005). Theoretical and practical issues in the construction of a Greek dependency treebank. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories (TLT), pages 149-160.
42. Ross, S. and Bagnell, J. A. (2010). Efficient reductions for imitation learning. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics.
43. Ross, S., Gordon, G. J., and Bagnell, J. A. (2011). A reduction of imitation learning and structured prediction to no-regret online learning. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics.
44. Yamada, H. and Matsumoto, Y. (2003). Statistical dependency analysis with support vector machines. In Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT), pages 195-206.
45. Zhang, Y. and Clark, S. (2008). A tale of two parsers: Investigating and combining graph-based and transition-based dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 562-571.
46. Zhang, Y. and Nivre, J. (2011). Transition-based dependency parsing with rich non-local features. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 188-193.