Constrained decoding for text-level discourse parsing

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

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 1883-1900

  Muller, Philippe ^a   Afantenos, Stergos ^a   Denis, Pascal ^b   Asher, Nicholas ^c  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^b Campus de Beaulieu   (France)

^c CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

A*; Constrained decoding; Dependency structures; Discourse parsing; Discourse structure

Indexed keywords

A; CONSTRAINED DECODING; DEPENDENCY STRUCTURES; DISCOURSE PARSING; DISCOURSE STRUCTURE;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; SEMANTICS;

DECODING;

EID: 84876801079     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (34)

1. Afantenos, S., Asher, N., Benamara, F., Bras, M., Fabre, C., Ho-Dac, M., Draoulec, A. L., Muller, P., Pery-Woodley, M.-P., Prevot, L., Rebeyrolles, J., Tanguy, L., Vergez-Couret, M., and Vieu, L. (2012). An empirical resource for discovering cognitive principles of discourse organisation: The annodis corpus. In Calzolari, N., Choukri, K., Declerck, T., Dǒgan, M. U., Maegaard, B., Mariani, J., Odijk, J., and Piperidis, S., editors, Proceedings of the Eight International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'12), Istanbul, Turkey. European Language Resources Association (ELRA).
2. Asher, N. and Lascarides, A. (2003). Logics of Conversation. Studies in Natural Language Processing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
3. Baldridge, J., Asher, N., and Hunter, J. (2007). Annotation for and Robust Parsing of Discourse Structure on Unrestricted Texts. Zeitschrift fur Sprachwissenschaft, 26:213-239.
4. Baldridge, J. and Lascarides, A. (2005). Probabilistic head-driven parsing for discourse structure. In Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL).
5. Carlson, L., Marcu, D., and Okurowski, M. E. (2003). Building a discourse-tagged corpus in the framework of rhetorical structure theory. In van Kuppevelt, J. and Smith, R., editors, Current Directions in Discourse and Dialogue, pages 85-112. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
6. Chu, Y. J. and Liu, T. H. (1965). On the shortest arborescence of a directed graph. Science Sinica, 14:1396-1400.
7. Curk, T., Demšar, J., Xu, Q., Leban, G., Petrovič, U., Bratko, I., Shaulsky, G., and Zupan, B. (2005). Microarray data mining with visual programming. Bioinformatics, 21:396-398.
8. Daumé III, H. (2004). Notes on CG and LM-BFGS optimization of logistic regression. Paper available at http://pub.hal3.name#daume04cg-bfgs, implementationavailableathttp://hal3.name/megam/.
9. duVerle, D. and Prendinger, H. (2009). A novel discourse parser based on support vector machine classification. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP, pages 665-673, Suntec, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
10. Edmonds, J. (1967). Optimum branchings. Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, 71B(233-240).
11. Feng, V. W. and Hirst, G. (2012). Text-level discourse parsing with rich linguistic features. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 60-68, Jeju Island, Korea. Association for Computational Linguistics.
12. Gerber, M., Gordon, A., and Sagae, K. (2010). Open-domain commonsense reasoning using discourse relations from a corpus of weblog stories. In Proceedings of the NAACL HLT 2010 First International Workshop on Formalisms and Methodology for Learning by Reading, pages 43-51, Los Angeles, California. Association for Computational Linguistics.
13. Hernault, H., Prendinger, H., duVerle, D. A., and Ishizuka, M. (2010). HILDA: A Discourse Parser Using Support Vector Machine Classification. Dialogue and Discourse, 1(3):1-33.
14. Joty, S., Carenini, G., and Ng, R. (2012). A novel discriminative framework for sentencelevel discourse analysis. In Proceedings of the 2012 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning, pages 904-915, Jeju Island, Korea. Association for Computational Linguistics.
15. Lin, Z., Kan, M.-Y., and Ng, H. T. (2009). Recognizing implicit discourse relations in the Penn Discourse Treebank. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 343-351, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
16. Lin, Z., Ng, H. T., and Kan, M.-Y. (2011). Automatically evaluating text coherence using discourse relations. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 997-1006, Portland, Oregon, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
17. Louis, A., Joshi, A., Prasad, R., and Nenkova, A. (2010). Using entity features to classify implicit discourse relations. In Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2010 Conference, pages 59-62, Tokyo, Japan. Association for Computational Linguistics.
18. Mann, W. C. and Thompson, S. A. (1987). Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Framework for the Analysis of Texts. Technical Report ISI/RS-87-185, Information Sciences Institute, Marina del Rey, California.
19. Marcu, D. (2000). The Theory and Practice of Discourse Parsing and Summarization. The MIT Press.
20. Marcu, D. and Echihabi, A. (2002). An unsupervised approach to recognizing discourse relations. In Proceedings of ACL, pages 368-375.
21. McDonald, R. T., Pereira, F., Ribarov, K., and Hajic, J. (2005). Non-projective dependency parsing using spanning tree algorithms. In HLT/EMNLP.
22. Pauls, A. and Klein, D. (2009). K-best parsing. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP, pages 958-966, Suntec, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
23. Polanyi, L. (1988). A formal model of the structure of discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 12:601-638.
24. Prasad, R., Dinesh, N., Lee, A., Miltsakaki, E., Robaldo, L., Joshi, A., and Webber, B. L. (2008). The Penn Discourse TreeBank 2.0. In Proceedings of LREC 2008.
25. Sagae, K. (2009). Analysis of discourse structure with syntactic dependencies and datadriven shift-reduce parsing. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Parsing Technologies, IWPT '09, pages 81-84, Stroudsburg, PA, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
26. Somasundaran, S., Namata, G., Wiebe, J., and Getoor, L. (2009). Supervised and unsupervised methods in employing discourse relations for improving opinion polarity classification. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 170-179, Singapore. Association for Computational Linguistics.
27. Soricut, R. and Marcu, D. (2003). Sentence level discourse parsing using syntactic and lexical information. In Proceedings of the 2003 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Human Language Technology-Volume 1, pages 149-156. Association for Computational Linguistics.
28. Sporleder, C. and Lascarides, A. (2005). Exploiting linguistic cues to classify rhetorical relations. In Proceedings of Recent Advances in Natural Langauge Processing (RANLP), Bulgaria.
29. Sporleder, C. and Lascarides, A. (2008). Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment. Natural Language Engineering, 14(3):369-416.
30. Stede, M. (2011). Discourse Processing. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies. Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
31. Subba, R. and Di Eugenio, B. (2009). An effective discourse parser that uses rich linguistic information. In Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2009 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 566-574, Boulder, Colorado. Association for Computational Linguistics.
32. Verberne, S., Boves, L., Oostdijk, N., and Coppen, P.-A. (2007). Evaluating discoursebased answer extraction for why-question answering. In Proceedings of the 30th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval, SIGIR '07, pages 735-736, New York, NY, USA. ACM.
33. Wellner, B., Pustejovsky, J., Havasi, C., Rumshisky, A., and Saurí, R. (2006). Classification of discourse coherence relations: An exploratory study using multiple knowledge sources. In Proceedings of the 7th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue, SigDIAL '06, pages 117-125, Stroudsburg, PA, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
34. Wolf, F. and Gibson, E. (2006). Coherence in Natural Language: Data Stuctures and Applications. The MIT Press.