Discourse generation using utility-trained coherence models

COLING/ACL 2006 - 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Main Conference Poster Sessions

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 803-810

  Soricut, Radu ^a   Marcu, Daniel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; STOCHASTIC MODELS;

COHERENCE MODELS; GENERIC FRAMEWORKS; INDIVIDUAL STRENGTH; INTEGRAL PART; MODEL AND ALGORITHMS; PERFORMANCE; STOCHASTIC-MODELING; STOCHASTICS;

STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

EID: 84987948939     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (27)

1. Ernst Althaus, Nikiforos Karamanis, and Alexander Koller. 2005. Computing locally coherent discourse. In Proceedings of the ACL, pages 399-406.
2. Regina Barzilay and Mirella Lapata. 2005. Modeling local coherence: An entity-based approach. In Proceedings of the ACL, pages 141-148.
3. Regina Barzilay and Lillian Lee. 2004. Catching the drift: Probabilistic content models, with applications to generation and summarization. In Proceedings of the HLTNAACL, pages 113-120.
4. Regina Barzilay, Noemie Elhadad, and Kathleen R. McKeown. 2002. Inferring strategies for sentence ordering in multidocument news summarization. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 17:35-55.
5. Peter F. Brown, Stephen A. Della Pietra, Vincent J. Della Pietra, and Robert L. Mercer. 1993. The mathematics of statistical machine translation: Parameter estimation. Computational Linguistics, 19(2):263-311.
6. L. Carlson, D. Marcu, and M. E. Okurowski. 2003. Building a discourse-tagged corpus in the framework of Rhetorical Structure Theory. In J. van Kuppevelt and R. Smith, eds., Current Directions in Discourse and Dialogue. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
7. K. Forbes, E. Miltsakaki, R. Prasad, A. Sarkar, A. Joshi, and B. Webber. 2001. D-LTAG System: Discourse parsing with a lexicalized tree-adjoining grammar. In Workshop on Information Structure, Discourse Structure and Discourse Semantics.
8. Barbara J. Grosz, Aravind K. Joshi, and Scott Weinstein. 1995. Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2):203-226.
9. Liang Huang and David Chiang. 2005. Better k-best parsing. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Parsing Technologies (IWPT 2005).
10. Nikiforos Karamanis and Hisar M. Manurung. 2002. Stochastic text structuring using the principle of continuity. In Proceedings of INLG, pages 81-88.
11. Nikiforos Karamanis, Massimo Poesio, Chris Mellish, and Jon Oberlander. 2004. Evaluating centering-based metrics of coherence for text structuring using a reliably annotated corpus. In Proc. of the ACL.
12. Rodger Kibble and Richard Power. 2004. Optimising referential coherence in text generation. Computational Linguistics, 30(4):410-416.
13. Kevin Knight. 2003. Personal Communication.
14. Mirella Lapata. 2003. Probabilistic text structuring: Experiments with text ordering. In Proceedings of the ACL, pages 545-552.
15. William C. Mann and Sandra A. Thompson. 1988. Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text, 8(3):243-281.
16. Daniel Marcu. 1996. In Proceedings of the Student Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 136-143.
17. Daniel Marcu. 2000. The Theory and Practice of Discourse Parsing and Summarization. The MIT Press.
18. Chris Mellish, Alistair Knott, Jon Oberlander, and Mick O'Donnell. 1998. Experiments using stochastic search for text planning. In Proceedings of the INLG, pages 98-107.
19. Jane Morris and Graeme Hirst. 1991. Lexical cohesion computed by thesaural relations as an indicator of the structure of text. Computational Linguistics, 17(1):21-48.
20. Mark-Jan Nederhof and Giorgio Satta. 2004. IDL-expressions: a formalism for representing and parsing finite languages in natural language processing. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, pages 287-317.
21. Vincent Ng. 2005. Machine learning for coreference resolution: from local clasiffication to global reranking. In Procedings of the ACL, pages 157-164.
22. Franz Josef Och. 2003. Minimum error rate training in statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the ACL, pages 160-167.
23. Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu. 2002. BLEU: a method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proceedings of the ACL, pages 311-318.
24. Stuart Russell and Peter Norvig. 1995. Artificial Intelligence. A Modern Approach. Prentice Hall.
25. Donia R. Scott and Clarisse S. de Souza. 1990. Getting the message across in RST-based text generation. In Robert Dale, Chris Mellish, and Michael Zock, eds., Current Research in Natural Language Generation, pages 47-73. Academic Press.
26. Radu Soricut and Daniel Marcu. 2005. Towards developing generation algorithms for text-to-text applications. In Proceedings of the ACL, pages 66-74.
27. Radu Soricut. 2006. Natural Language Generation for Text-to-Text Applications Using an Information-Slim Representation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Southern California.