More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

Article

Free access

A DOP model for semantic interpretation

Authors:

Remko SchaAuthors Info & Claims

ACL '98/EACL '98: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and Eighth Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Pages 159 - 167

https://doi.org/10.3115/976909.979638

Published: 07 July 1997 Publication History

Abstract

In data-oriented language processing, an annotated language corpus is used as a stochastic grammar. The most probable analysis of a new sentence is constructed by combining fragments from the corpus in the most probable way. This approach has been successfully used for syntactic analysis, using corpora with syntactic annotations such as the Penn Tree-bank. If a corpus with semantically annotated sentences is used, the same approach can also generate the most probable semantic interpretation of an input sentence. The present paper explains this semantic interpretation method. A data-oriented semantic interpretation algorithm was tested on two semantically annotated corpora: the English ATIS corpus and the Dutch OVIS corpus. Experiments show an increase in semantic accuracy if larger corpus-fragments are taken into consideration.

References

[1]

M. van den Berg, R. Bod, and R. Scha. 1994. A Corpus-Based Approach to Semantic Interpretation. In Proceedings Ninth Amsterdam Colloquium. ILLC, University of Amsterdam.

[2]

E. Black, R. Garside, and G. Leech. 1993. Statistically-Driven Computer Grammars of English: The IBM/Lancaster Approach. Rodopi, Amsterdam-Atlanta.

[3]

R. Bod. 1992. A computational model of language performance: Data Oriented Parsing. In Proceedings COLING'92, Nantes.

Digital Library

[4]

R. Bod. 1993a. Monte Carlo Parsing. In Proceedings Third International Workshop on Parsing Technologies, Tilburg/Durbuy.

[5]

R. Bod. 1993b. Using an Annotated Corpus as a Stochastic Grammar. In Proceedings EACL'93, Utrecht.

Digital Library

[6]

R. Bod. 1995. Enriching Linguistics with Statistics: Performance models of Natural Language. Phd-thesis, ILLC-dissertation series 1995--14, University of Amsterdam. ftp://ftp.fwi.uva.nl/pub/theory/illc/-dissertations/DS-95-14.text.ps.gz

[7]

R. Bod. 1996. Two Questions about Data-Oriented Parsing. In Proceedings Fourth Workshop on Very Large Corpora, Copenhagen, Denmark. (cmp-lg/9606022).

[8]

R. Bod, R. Bonnema, and R. Scha. 1996. A data-oriented approach to semantic interpretation. In Proceedings Workshop on Corpus-Oriented Semantic Analysis, ECAI-96, Budapest, Hungary. (cmp-lg/9606024).

Digital Library

[9]

R. Bod and R. Scha. 1996. Data-oriented language processing. an overview. Technical Report LP-96-13, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, University of Amsterdam. (cmp-lg/9611003).

[10]

R. Bonnema. 1996. Data oriented semantics. Master's thesis, Department of Computational Linguistics, University of Amsterdam. http://mars.let.uva.nl/remko_b/-dopsem/scriptie.html

[11]

T. Briscoe. 1994. Prospects for practical parsing of unrestricted text: Robust statistical parsing techniques. In N. Oostdijk and P. de Haan, editors, Corpus-based Research into Language. Rodopi, Amsterdam.

[12]

E. Charniak. 1996. Tree-bank grammars. In Proceedings AAAI'96, Portland, Oregon.

Digital Library

[13]

L. Gamut. 1991. Logic, Language and Meaning. Chicago University Press.

[14]

J Goodman. 1996. Efficient Algorithms for Parsing the DOP Model. In Proceedings Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

[15]

R. Kaplan. 1996. A probabilistic approach to Lexical-Functional Grammar. Keynote paper held at the LFG-workshop 1996, Grenoble, France. ftp://ftp.parc.xerox.com/pub/-nl/slides/grenoble96/kaplan-doptalk.ps.

[16]

M. Marcus, B. Santorini, and M. Marcinkiewicz. 1993. Building a Large Annotated Corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19(2).

Digital Library

[17]

F. Pereira and Y. Schabes. 1992. Inside-outside reestimation from partially bracketed corpora. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the ACL, Newark, De.

Digital Library

[18]

M. Rajman. 1995a. Apports d'une approche a base de corpus aux techniques de traitement automatique du langage naturel. Ph.D. thesis, Ecole Nationale Superieure des Telecommunications, Paris.

[19]

M. Rajman. 1995b. Approche probabiliste de l'analyse syntaxique. Traitement Automatique des Langues, 36:1--2.

[20]

S. Sekine and R. Grishman. 1995. A corpus-based probabilistic grammar with only two non-terminals. In Proceedings Fourth International Workshop on Parsing Technologies, Prague, Czech Republic.

[21]

K. Sima'an, R. Bod, S. Krauwer, and R. Scha. 1994. Efficient Disambiguation by means of Stochastic Tree Substitution Grammars. In Proceedings International Conference on New Methods in Language Processing. CCL, UMIST, Manchester.

[22]

K. Sima'an. 1995. An optimized algorithm for Data Oriented Parsing. In Proceedings International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing. Tzigov Chark, Bulgaria.

[23]

K. Sima'an. 1996a. An optimized algorithm for Data Oriented Parsing. In R. Mitkov and N. Nicolov, editors, Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing 1995, volume 136 of Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.

[24]

K. Sima'an. 1996b. Computational Complexity of Probabilistic Disambiguation by means of Tree-Grammars. In Proceedings COLING'96, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Digital Library

[25]

D. Tugwell. 1995. A state-transition grammar for data-oriented parsing. In Proceedings European Chapter of the ACL'95, Dublin, Ireland.

Digital Library

[26]

G. Veldhuijzen van Zanten. 1996. Semantics of update expressions. NWO priority Programme Language and Speech Technology, http://grid.let.rug.nl:4321/.

Cited By

Van Noord GBouma GKoeling RNederhof M(2018)Robust grammatical analysis for spoken dialogue systemsNatural Language Engineering10.1017/S13513249990021565:1(45-93)Online publication date: 21-Dec-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1017/S1351324999002156
Yuret DHan ATurgut ZErk KStrapparava C(2010)SemEval-2010 task 12: Parser evaluation using textual entailmentsProceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation10.5555/1859664.1859673(51-56)Online publication date: 15-Jul-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1859664.1859673
Gambino OCalvo H(2007)On the usage of morphological tags for grammar inductionProceedings of the artificial intelligence 6th Mexican international conference on Advances in artificial intelligence10.5555/1775967.1776061(912-921)Online publication date: 4-Nov-2007
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1775967.1776061
Show More Cited By

A DOP model for semantic interpretation
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Artificial intelligence
2. Hardware
  1. Power and energy
    1. Power estimation and optimization

Recommendations

Context-sensitive spoken dialogue processing with the DOP model

We show how the DOP model can be used for fast and robust context-sensitive processing of spoken input in a practical spoken dialogue system called OVIS. OVIS (Openbaar Vervoer Informatie Systeem) – ‘Public Transport Information System’, is a Dutch ...
Semantic interpretation against ambiguity
An empirical evaluation of LFG-DOP
COLING '00: Proceedings of the 18th conference on Computational linguistics - Volume 1

This paper presents an empirical assessment of the LFG-DOP model introduced by Bod & Kaplan (1998). The parser we describe uses fragments from LFG-annotated sentences to parse new sentences and Monte Carlo techniques to compute the most probable parse. ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image DL Hosted proceedings

ACL '98/EACL '98: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and Eighth Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

July 1997

543 pages

Program Chairs:
Philip R. Cohen
Oregon Graduate Institute
,
Wolfgang Wahlster
DFKI Saarbrücken, Germany

Sponsors

Directorate General XIII (European Commission)
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid

Publisher

Association for Computational Linguistics

United States

Publication History

Published: 07 July 1997

Qualifiers

Article

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 85 of 443 submissions, 19%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

14
Total Citations
View Citations
390
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)63
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)16

Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Van Noord GBouma GKoeling RNederhof M(2018)Robust grammatical analysis for spoken dialogue systemsNatural Language Engineering10.1017/S13513249990021565:1(45-93)Online publication date: 21-Dec-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1017/S1351324999002156
Yuret DHan ATurgut ZErk KStrapparava C(2010)SemEval-2010 task 12: Parser evaluation using textual entailmentsProceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation10.5555/1859664.1859673(51-56)Online publication date: 15-Jul-2010
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1859664.1859673
Gambino OCalvo H(2007)On the usage of morphological tags for grammar inductionProceedings of the artificial intelligence 6th Mexican international conference on Advances in artificial intelligence10.5555/1775967.1776061(912-921)Online publication date: 4-Nov-2007
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1775967.1776061
Bod RButtery PVillavicencio AKorhonen A(2007)A linguistic investigation into unsupervised DOPProceedings of the Workshop on Cognitive Aspects of Computational Language Acquisition10.5555/1629795.1629796(1-8)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2007
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1629795.1629796
Bod R(2006)An all-subtrees approach to unsupervised parsingProceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics10.3115/1220175.1220284(865-872)Online publication date: 17-Jul-2006
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.3115/1220175.1220284
Sima'an K(2004)Robust data oriented spoken language understandingNew developments in parsing technology10.5555/1139041.1139058(323-338)Online publication date: 1-Jan-2004
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1139041.1139058
Bod RCopestake AHajic J(2003)An efficient implementation of a new DOP modelProceedings of the tenth conference on European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics - Volume 110.3115/1067807.1067812(19-26)Online publication date: 12-Apr-2003
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.3115/1067807.1067812
Romacker MHahn UWiebe J(2000)An empirical assessment of semantic interpretationProceedings of the 1st North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics conference10.5555/974305.974348(327-334)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2000
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/974305.974348
Bod RKay M(2000)Parsing with the shortest derivationProceedings of the 18th conference on Computational linguistics - Volume 110.3115/990820.990831(69-75)Online publication date: 31-Jul-2000
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.3115/990820.990831
Bod RKay M(2000)An empirical evaluation of LFG-DOPProceedings of the 18th conference on Computational linguistics - Volume 110.3115/990820.990830(62-68)Online publication date: 31-Jul-2000
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.3115/990820.990830
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents