Results 1 - 10
of
60
Non-projective dependency parsing using spanning tree algorithms
- In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
, 2005
"... We formalize weighted dependency parsing as searching for maximum spanning trees (MSTs) in directed graphs. Using this representation, the parsing algorithm of Eisner (1996) is sufficient for searching over all projective trees in O(n 3) time. More surprisingly, the representation is extended natura ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 177 (9 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We formalize weighted dependency parsing as searching for maximum spanning trees (MSTs) in directed graphs. Using this representation, the parsing algorithm of Eisner (1996) is sufficient for searching over all projective trees in O(n 3) time. More surprisingly, the representation is extended naturally to non-projective parsing using Chu-Liu-Edmonds (Chu and Liu, 1965; Edmonds, 1967) MST algorithm, yielding an O(n 2) parsing algorithm. We evaluate these methods on the Prague Dependency Treebank using online large-margin learning techniques (Crammer et al., 2003; McDonald et al., 2005) and show that MST parsing increases efficiency and accuracy for languages with non-projective dependencies. 1
CoNLL-X shared task on multilingual dependency parsing
- In Proc. of CoNLL
, 2006
"... Each year the Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL) 1 features a shared task, in which participants train and test their systems on exactly the same data sets, in order to better compare systems. The tenth CoNLL (CoNLL-X) saw a shared task on Multilingual Dependency Parsing. ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 161 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Each year the Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL) 1 features a shared task, in which participants train and test their systems on exactly the same data sets, in order to better compare systems. The tenth CoNLL (CoNLL-X) saw a shared task on Multilingual Dependency Parsing. In this paper, we describe how treebanks for 13 languages were converted into the same dependency format and how parsing performance was measured. We also give an overview of the parsing approaches that participants took and the results that they achieved. Finally, we try to draw general conclusions about multi-lingual parsing: What makes a particular language, treebank or annotation scheme easier or harder to parse and which phenomena are challenging for any dependency parser? Acknowledgement Many thanks to Amit Dubey and Yuval Krymolowski, the other two organizers of the shared task, for discussions, converting treebanks, writing software and helping with the papers. 2
Online large-margin training of dependency parsers
- In Proc. ACL
, 2005
"... We present an effective training algorithm for linearly-scored dependency parsers that implements online largemargin multi-class training (Crammer and Singer, 2003; Crammer et al., 2003) on top of efficient parsing techniques for dependency trees (Eisner, 1996). The trained parsers achieve a competi ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 156 (16 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We present an effective training algorithm for linearly-scored dependency parsers that implements online largemargin multi-class training (Crammer and Singer, 2003; Crammer et al., 2003) on top of efficient parsing techniques for dependency trees (Eisner, 1996). The trained parsers achieve a competitive dependency accuracy for both English and Czech with no language specific enhancements. 1
Memory-based dependency parsing
- In Proceedings of CoNLL
, 2004
"... In order to realize the full potential of dependency-based syntactic parsing, it is desirable to allow non-projective dependency structures. We show how a datadriven deterministic dependency parser, in itself restricted to projective structures, can be combined with graph transformation techniques t ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 153 (32 self)
- Add to MetaCart
In order to realize the full potential of dependency-based syntactic parsing, it is desirable to allow non-projective dependency structures. We show how a datadriven deterministic dependency parser, in itself restricted to projective structures, can be combined with graph transformation techniques to produce non-projective structures. Experiments using data from the Prague Dependency Treebank show that the combined system can handle nonprojective constructions with a precision sufficient to yield a significant improvement in overall parsing accuracy. This leads to the best reported performance for robust non-projective parsing of Czech. 1
Maltparser: A language-independent system for data-driven dependency parsing
- In Proc. of the Fourth Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories
, 2005
"... ..."
Algorithms for Deterministic Incremental Dependency Parsing
- Computational Linguistics
, 2008
"... Parsing algorithms that process the input from left to right and construct a single derivation have often been considered inadequate for natural language parsing because of the massive ambiguity typically found in natural language grammars. Nevertheless, it has been shown that such algorithms, combi ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 39 (10 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Parsing algorithms that process the input from left to right and construct a single derivation have often been considered inadequate for natural language parsing because of the massive ambiguity typically found in natural language grammars. Nevertheless, it has been shown that such algorithms, combined with treebank-induced classifiers, can be used to build highly accurate disambiguating parsers, in particular for dependency-based syntactic representations. In this article, we first present a general framework for describing and analyzing algorithms for deterministic incremental dependency parsing, formalized as transition systems. We then describe and analyze two families of such algorithms: stack-based and list-based algorithms. In the former family, which is restricted to projective dependency structures, we describe an arc-eager and an arc-standard variant; in the latter family, we present a projective and a nonprojective variant. For each of the four algorithms, we give proofs of correctness and complexity. In addition, we perform an experimental evaluation of all algorithms in combination with SVM classifiers for predicting the next parsing action, using data from thirteen languages. We show that all four algorithms give competitive accuracy, although the non-projective list-based algorithm generally outperforms the projective algorithms for languages with a non-negligible proportion of non-projective constructions. However, the projective algorithms often produce comparable results when combined with the technique known as pseudo-projective parsing. The linear time complexity of the stack-based algorithms gives them an advantage with respect to efficiency both in learning and in parsing, but the projective list-based algorithm turns out to be equally efficient in practice. Moreover, when the projective algorithms are used to implement pseudo-projective parsing, they sometimes become less efficient in parsing (but not in learning) than the non-projective list-based algorithm. Although most of the algorithms have been partially described in the literature before, this is the first comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the algorithms within a unified framework. 1.
A Classifier-Based Parser with Linear Run-Time Complexity
, 2005
"... We present a classifier-based parser that produces constituent trees in linear time. ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 38 (5 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We present a classifier-based parser that produces constituent trees in linear time.
Parser combination by reparsing
- In Proc. HLT/NAACL
, 2006
"... We present a novel parser combination scheme that works by reparsing input sentences once they have already been parsed by several different parsers. We apply this idea to dependency and constituent parsing, generating results that surpass state-of-theart ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 33 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
We present a novel parser combination scheme that works by reparsing input sentences once they have already been parsed by several different parsers. We apply this idea to dependency and constituent parsing, generating results that surpass state-of-theart
On the complexity of non-projective data-driven dependency parsing
- In Proc. IWPT
, 2007
"... In this paper we investigate several nonprojective parsing algorithms for dependency parsing, providing novel polynomial time solutions under the assumption that each dependency decision is independent of all the others, called here the edge-factored model. We also investigate algorithms for non-pro ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 22 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
In this paper we investigate several nonprojective parsing algorithms for dependency parsing, providing novel polynomial time solutions under the assumption that each dependency decision is independent of all the others, called here the edge-factored model. We also investigate algorithms for non-projective parsing that account for nonlocal information, and present several hardness results. This suggests that it is unlikely that exact non-projective dependency parsing is tractable for any model richer than the edge-factored model. 1
Novel Estimation Methods for Unsupervised Discovery of Latent Structure in Natural Language Text
, 2006
"... This thesis is about estimating probabilistic models to uncover useful hidden structure in data; specifically, we address the problem of discovering syntactic structure in natural language text. We present three new parameter estimation techniques that generalize the standard approach, maximum likel ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 20 (7 self)
- Add to MetaCart
This thesis is about estimating probabilistic models to uncover useful hidden structure in data; specifically, we address the problem of discovering syntactic structure in natural language text. We present three new parameter estimation techniques that generalize the standard approach, maximum likelihood estimation, in different ways. Contrastive estimation maximizes the conditional probability of the observed data given a “neighborhood” of implicit negative examples. Skewed deterministic annealing locally maximizes likelihood using a cautious parameter search strategy that starts with an easier optimization problem than likelihood, and iteratively moves to harder problems, culminating in likelihood. Structural annealing is similar, but starts with a heavy bias toward simple syntactic structures and gradually relaxes the bias. Our estimation methods do not make use of annotated examples. We consider their performance in both an unsupervised model selection setting, where models trained under different initialization and regularization settings are compared by evaluating the training objective on a small set of unseen, unannotated development data, and supervised model selection, where the most accurate model on the development set (now with annotations)

