Results 1  10
of
10
Parsing InsideOut
, 1998
"... Probabilistic ContextFree Grammars (PCFGs) and variations on them have recently become some of the most common formalisms for parsing. It is common with PCFGs to compute the inside and outside probabilities. When these probabilities are multiplied together and normalized, they produce the probabili ..."
Abstract

Cited by 82 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Probabilistic ContextFree Grammars (PCFGs) and variations on them have recently become some of the most common formalisms for parsing. It is common with PCFGs to compute the inside and outside probabilities. When these probabilities are multiplied together and normalized, they produce the probability that any given nonterminal covers any piece of the input sentence. The traditional use of these probabilities is to improve the probabilities of grammar rules. In this thesis we show that these values are useful for solving many other problems in Statistical Natural Language Processing. We give a framework for describing parsers. The framework generalizes the inside and outside values to semirings. It makes it easy to describe parsers that compute a wide variety of interesting quantities, including the inside and outside probabilities, as well as related quantities such as Viterbi probabilities and nbest lists. We also present three novel uses for the inside and outside probabilities. T...
Semiring Parsing
 Computational Linguistics
, 1999
"... this paper is that all five of these commonly computed quantities can be described as elements of complete semirings (Kuich 1997). The relationship between grammars and semirings was discovered by Chomsky and Schtitzenberger (1963), and for parsing with the CKY algorithm, dates back to Teitelbaum ( ..."
Abstract

Cited by 64 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
this paper is that all five of these commonly computed quantities can be described as elements of complete semirings (Kuich 1997). The relationship between grammars and semirings was discovered by Chomsky and Schtitzenberger (1963), and for parsing with the CKY algorithm, dates back to Teitelbaum (1973). A complete semiring is a set of values over which a multiplicative operator and a commutative additive operator have been defined, and for which infinite summations are defined. For parsing algorithms satisfying certain conditions, the multiplicative and additive operations of any complete semiring can be used in place of/x and , and correct values will be returned. We will give a simple normal form for describing parsers, then precisely define complete semirings, and the conditions for correctness
Weighted rational transductions and their application to human language processing
 In ARPA Workshop on Human Language Technology
, 1994
"... We present the concepts of weighted language, ~ansduction and automaton from algebraic automata theory as a general framework for describing and implementing decoding cascades in speech and language processing. This generality allows us to represent uniformly such information sources as pronunciat ..."
Abstract

Cited by 50 (8 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present the concepts of weighted language, ~ansduction and automaton from algebraic automata theory as a general framework for describing and implementing decoding cascades in speech and language processing. This generality allows us to represent uniformly such information sources as pronunciation dictionaries, language models artd lattices, and to use uniform algorithms for building decoding stages and for optimizing and combining them. In particular, a single automata join algorithm can be used either to combine information sources such as a pronunciation dictionary and a contextdependency model during the construction of a decoder, or dynamically during the operation of the decoder. Applications to speech recognition and to Chinese text segmentation will be discussed. 1.
Recognition can be Harder than Parsing
 Computational Intelligence
, 1992
"... this paper is to discuss the scope and limitations of this approach, and to examine the suitability of several syntactic formalisms on the criterion of their ability to handle it. 2 Parsing as intersection ..."
Abstract

Cited by 39 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
this paper is to discuss the scope and limitations of this approach, and to examine the suitability of several syntactic formalisms on the criterion of their ability to handle it. 2 Parsing as intersection
The intersection of Finite State Automata and Definite Clause Grammars
, 1995
"... Bernard Lang defines parsing as the calculation of the intersection of a FSA (the input) and a CFG. Viewing the input for parsing as a FSA rather than as a string combines well with some approaches in speech understanding systems, in which parsing takes a word lattice as input (rather than a word st ..."
Abstract

Cited by 20 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Bernard Lang defines parsing as the calculation of the intersection of a FSA (the input) and a CFG. Viewing the input for parsing as a FSA rather than as a string combines well with some approaches in speech understanding systems, in which parsing takes a word lattice as input (rather than a word string). Furthermore, certain techniques for robust parsing can be modelled as finite state transducers.
Reducing the Worst Case Running Times of a Family of RNA and CFG Problems, Using Valiant’s Approach
"... Abstract. We study Valiant’s classical algorithm for Context Free Grammar recognition in subcubic time, and extract features that are common to problems on which Valiant’s approach can be applied. Based on this, we describe several problem templates, and formulate generic algorithms that use Valian ..."
Abstract

Cited by 2 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We study Valiant’s classical algorithm for Context Free Grammar recognition in subcubic time, and extract features that are common to problems on which Valiant’s approach can be applied. Based on this, we describe several problem templates, and formulate generic algorithms that use Valiant’s technique and can be applied to all problems which abide by these templates. These algorithms obtain new worst case running time bounds for a large family of important problems within the world of RNA Secondary Structures and Context Free Grammars. 1
A Generative View of IllFormed Input Processing (Extended Abstract)
, 1989
"... Bernard LANG INRIA B.P. 105, 78153 Le Chesnay, France lang@inria.inria.fr The intent of this presentation is to exhibit the commonalities between the following syntactic problems: 1. parsing ambiguous or incomplete input, often known as word lattice parsing; 2. parsing illformed input, i.e. inpu ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Bernard LANG INRIA B.P. 105, 78153 Le Chesnay, France lang@inria.inria.fr The intent of this presentation is to exhibit the commonalities between the following syntactic problems: 1. parsing ambiguous or incomplete input, often known as word lattice parsing; 2. parsing illformed input, i.e. input that does not belong to the language formally defined by a grammar; 3. syntactic disambiguation of ambiguous sentences; 4. accounting for deviant syntactic structures in grammatical language descriptions. The key idea behind this work is that of a weighted grammar. For simplicity we consider here only a special case of the more general definition given in [Teitelbaum 73], which could lead to other interesting variations (e.g. probabilities as weights, using multiplication instead of addition as below). We define a weighted grammar as a ContextFree (CF) grammar with a numeric weight attached to each of its rules. We attach to any derivation tree a weight that is the sum of the weights of a...
Robust Efficient Parsing for Spoken Dialogue Processing
, 1998
"... ion (Johnson and Dorre, [39]) ffl x(A,B,f(A,B),g(A,h(B,i(C)))) =) x(A,B,f(,),g(,)) ffl parsewithweakening(Cat,P0,P,E0,E) : weaken(Cat,WeakenedCat), parse(WeakenedCat,P0,P,E0,E), Cat=WeakenedCat. ffl Really helps! Ambiguity Packing ffl A parser should not construct all parse trees (exponential) ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
ion (Johnson and Dorre, [39]) ffl x(A,B,f(A,B),g(A,h(B,i(C)))) =) x(A,B,f(,),g(,)) ffl parsewithweakening(Cat,P0,P,E0,E) : weaken(Cat,WeakenedCat), parse(WeakenedCat,P0,P,E0,E), Cat=WeakenedCat. ffl Really helps! Ambiguity Packing ffl A parser should not construct all parse trees (exponential) ffl Instead, a compact representation of all such parse trees are constructed  grammar [42, 9]  parse forest [76]  packed structures [3] ffl Here: for every `result item' keep track of the lexical entry and references of other result items that were used to create it ffl Results in a lexicalized tree substitution grammar ffl which generates the input sentence with all its parse trees Bottomup Inactivechart Parser Item form: [i;X; j] Axioms: Goals: [0;S;n] Inference Rules: Scan [q i ;wi; qi+1 ] Complete [q k ;X1; q k 0][q k 0;X2; q k 00] : : : [q m0;Xl; qm] [q k ;X0; qm] X0 !X1:::Xl Bottomup Inactivechart Parser Inference Rules: Scan [q i ;wi; qi+...
family of RNA and CFG problems, using Valiant’s
"... Reducing the worst case running times of a ..."
AanderaaRosenberg [RV75]. Absolutely [Raj71].
, 2013
"... Version 1.02 Title word crossreference 2.5n [Pau75]. d [Ber79]. γ [Lon79]. L [ERS78]. n [LD75]. n log n [Mil78]. O(v O(g) ) [FMR79]. Ω(n 2 log n) [YAR77]. p [MY76].axiomatizable [Ber79].hierarchy [MY76].linear [LD75]. ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Version 1.02 Title word crossreference 2.5n [Pau75]. d [Ber79]. γ [Lon79]. L [ERS78]. n [LD75]. n log n [Mil78]. O(v O(g) ) [FMR79]. Ω(n 2 log n) [YAR77]. p [MY76].axiomatizable [Ber79].hierarchy [MY76].linear [LD75].