Results 1  10
of
364
Discriminative Reranking for Natural Language Parsing
, 2005
"... This article considers approaches which rerank the output of an existing probabilistic parser. The base parser produces a set of candidate parses for each input sentence, with associated probabilities that define an initial ranking of these parses. A second model then attempts to improve upon this i ..."
Abstract

Cited by 268 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This article considers approaches which rerank the output of an existing probabilistic parser. The base parser produces a set of candidate parses for each input sentence, with associated probabilities that define an initial ranking of these parses. A second model then attempts to improve upon this initial ranking, using additional features of the tree as evidence. The strength of our approach is that it allows a tree to be represented as an arbitrary set of features, without concerns about how these features interact or overlap and without the need to define a derivation or a generative model which takes these features into account. We introduce a new method for the reranking task, based on the boosting approach to ranking problems described in Freund et al. (1998). We apply the boosting method to parsing the Wall Street Journal treebank. The method combined the loglikelihood under a baseline model (that of Collins [1999]) with evidence from an additional 500,000 features over parse trees that were not included in the original model. The new model achieved 89.75 % Fmeasure, a 13 % relative decrease in Fmeasure error over the baseline model’s score of 88.2%. The article also introduces a new algorithm for the boosting approach which takes advantage of the sparsity of the feature space in the parsing data. Experiments show significant efficiency gains for the new algorithm over the obvious implementation of the boosting approach. We argue that the method is an appealing alternative—in terms of both simplicity and efficiency—to work on feature selection methods within loglinear (maximumentropy) models. Although the experiments in this article are on natural language parsing (NLP), the approach should be applicable to many other NLP problems which are naturally framed as ranking tasks, for example, speech recognition, machine translation, or natural language generation.
Online largemargin training of dependency parsers
 In Proc. ACL
, 2005
"... We present an effective training algorithm for linearlyscored dependency parsers that implements online largemargin multiclass 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 226 (19 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present an effective training algorithm for linearlyscored dependency parsers that implements online largemargin multiclass 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
Efficiently Inducing Features of Conditional Random Fields
, 2003
"... Conditional Random Fields (CRFs) are undirected graphical models, a special case of which correspond to conditionallytrained finite state machines. A key advantage of CRFs is their great flexibility to include a wide variety of arbitrary, nonindependent features of the input. Faced with ..."
Abstract

Cited by 182 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Conditional Random Fields (CRFs) are undirected graphical models, a special case of which correspond to conditionallytrained finite state machines. A key advantage of CRFs is their great flexibility to include a wide variety of arbitrary, nonindependent features of the input. Faced with
SemiMarkov conditional random fields for information extraction
 In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 17
, 2004
"... We describe semiMarkov conditional random fields (semiCRFs), a conditionally trained version of semiMarkov chains. Intuitively, a semiCRF on an input sequence x outputs a “segmentation ” of x, in which labels are assigned to segments (i.e., subsequences) of x rather than to individual elements x ..."
Abstract

Cited by 171 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We describe semiMarkov conditional random fields (semiCRFs), a conditionally trained version of semiMarkov chains. Intuitively, a semiCRF on an input sequence x outputs a “segmentation ” of x, in which labels are assigned to segments (i.e., subsequences) of x rather than to individual elements xi of x. Importantly, features for semiCRFs can measure properties of segments, and transitions within a segment can be nonMarkovian. In spite of this additional power, exact learning and inference algorithms for semiCRFs are polynomialtime—often only a small constant factor slower than conventional CRFs. In experiments on five named entity recognition problems, semiCRFs generally outperform conventional CRFs. 1
Parsing the WSJ using CCG and loglinear models
 In Proceedings of the 42nd Meeting of the ACL
, 2004
"... This paper describes and evaluates loglinear parsing models for Combinatory Categorial Grammar (CCG). A parallel implementation of the LBFGS optimisation algorithm is described, which runs on a Beowulf cluster allowing the complete Penn Treebank to be used for estimation. We also develop a new eff ..."
Abstract

Cited by 165 (21 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper describes and evaluates loglinear parsing models for Combinatory Categorial Grammar (CCG). A parallel implementation of the LBFGS optimisation algorithm is described, which runs on a Beowulf cluster allowing the complete Penn Treebank to be used for estimation. We also develop a new efficient parsing algorithm for CCG which maximises expected recall of dependencies. We compare models which use all CCG derivations, including nonstandard derivations, with normalform models. The performances of the two models are comparable and the results are competitive with existing widecoverage CCG parsers.
Domain adaptation with structural correspondence learning
 In EMNLP
, 2006
"... Discriminative learning methods are widely used in natural language processing. These methods work best when their training and test data are drawn from the same distribution. For many NLP tasks, however, we are confronted with new domains in which labeled data is scarce or nonexistent. In such cas ..."
Abstract

Cited by 153 (10 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Discriminative learning methods are widely used in natural language processing. These methods work best when their training and test data are drawn from the same distribution. For many NLP tasks, however, we are confronted with new domains in which labeled data is scarce or nonexistent. In such cases, we seek to adapt existing models from a resourcerich source domain to a resourcepoor target domain. We introduce structural correspondence learning to automatically induce correspondences among features from different domains. We test our technique on part of speech tagging and show performance gains for varying amounts of source and target training data, as well as improvements in target domain parsing accuracy using our improved tagger. 1
Widecoverage efficient statistical parsing with CCG and loglinear models
 COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS
, 2007
"... This paper describes a number of loglinear parsing models for an automatically extracted lexicalized grammar. The models are "full" parsing models in the sense that probabilities are defined for complete parses, rather than for independent events derived by decomposing the parse tree. Discriminativ ..."
Abstract

Cited by 149 (34 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper describes a number of loglinear parsing models for an automatically extracted lexicalized grammar. The models are "full" parsing models in the sense that probabilities are defined for complete parses, rather than for independent events derived by decomposing the parse tree. Discriminative training is used to estimate the models, which requires incorrect parses for each sentence in the training data as well as the correct parse. The lexicalized grammar formalism used is Combinatory Categorial Grammar (CCG), and the grammar is automatically extracted from CCGbank, a CCG version of the Penn Treebank. The combination of discriminative training and an automatically extracted grammar leads to a significant memory requirement (over 20 GB), which is satisfied using a parallel implementation of the BFGS optimisation algorithm running on a Beowulf cluster. Dynamic programming over a packed chart, in combination with the parallel implementation, allows us to solve one of the largestscale estimation problems in the statistical parsing literature in under three hours. A key component of the parsing system, for both training and testing, is a Maximum Entropy supertagger which assigns CCG lexical categories to words in a sentence. The supertagger makes the discriminative training feasible, and also leads to a highly efficient parser. Surprisingly,
The tradeoffs of large scale learning
 IN: ADVANCES IN NEURAL INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEMS 20
, 2008
"... This contribution develops a theoretical framework that takes into account the effect of approximate optimization on learning algorithms. The analysis shows distinct tradeoffs for the case of smallscale and largescale learning problems. Smallscale learning problems are subject to the usual approx ..."
Abstract

Cited by 138 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This contribution develops a theoretical framework that takes into account the effect of approximate optimization on learning algorithms. The analysis shows distinct tradeoffs for the case of smallscale and largescale learning problems. Smallscale learning problems are subject to the usual approximation–estimation tradeoff. Largescale learning problems are subject to a qualitatively different tradeoff involving the computational complexity of the underlying optimization algorithms in nontrivial ways.
Dynamic Conditional Random Fields: Factorized Probabilistic Models for Labeling and Segmenting Sequence Data
 IN ICML
, 2004
"... In sequence modeling, we often wish to represent complex interaction between labels, such as when performing multiple, cascaded labeling tasks on the same sequence, or when longrange dependencies exist. We present dynamic conditional random fields (DCRFs), a generalization of linearchain cond ..."
Abstract

Cited by 122 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In sequence modeling, we often wish to represent complex interaction between labels, such as when performing multiple, cascaded labeling tasks on the same sequence, or when longrange dependencies exist. We present dynamic conditional random fields (DCRFs), a generalization of linearchain conditional random fields (CRFs) in which each time slice contains a set of state variables and edgesa distributed state representation as in dynamic Bayesian networks (DBNs)and parameters are tied across slices. Since exact
Contrastive estimation: Training loglinear models on unlabeled data
 In Proc. of ACL
, 2005
"... Conditional random fields (Lafferty et al., 2001) are quite effective at sequence labeling tasks like shallow parsing (Sha and Pereira, 2003) and namedentity extraction (McCallum and Li, 2003). CRFs are loglinear, allowing the incorporation of arbitrary features into the model. To train on unlabele ..."
Abstract

Cited by 115 (14 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Conditional random fields (Lafferty et al., 2001) are quite effective at sequence labeling tasks like shallow parsing (Sha and Pereira, 2003) and namedentity extraction (McCallum and Li, 2003). CRFs are loglinear, allowing the incorporation of arbitrary features into the model. To train on unlabeled data, we require unsupervised estimation methods for loglinear models; few exist. We describe a novel approach, contrastive estimation. We show that the new technique can be intuitively understood as exploiting implicit negative evidence and is computationally efficient. Applied to a sequence labeling problem—POS tagging given a tagging dictionary and unlabeled text—contrastive estimation outperforms EM (with the same feature set), is more robust to degradations of the dictionary, and can largely recover by modeling additional features. 1