Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Next revision | Previous revision | ||
courses:rg:beyond-nombank [2010/10/13 18:47] popel comments to the presented paper |
courses:rg:beyond-nombank [2010/10/14 19:49] popel comments to the presented paper |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
[[http:// | [[http:// | ||
- | When reading the paper it is beneficial to have some basic knowledge about [[http:// | + | ===== Comments ===== |
+ | |||
+ | * When reading the paper it is beneficial to have some basic knowledge about [[http:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | * The paper (& PropBank & NomBank) is about **valency** and **dependency structure** of a sentence, although the paper does not use these terms. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Although it is not crucial for understanding the paper, we are not sure about terminology of SRL (Semantic Role Labeling), for example in a sentence //" | ||
+ | |||
+ | ^ A | companies | paper | customers | ||
+ | ^ B | arg0 | arg1 | arg2 | | ||
+ | ^ C | Agent | Theme | Beneficiary | | ||
+ | The question is how to call A, B, C using terms **(theta) role, argument, argument position?** My tip is A or B=argument, C=role. What about your tips? | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Note that word " | ||
+ | |||
+ | * Section 3.1 states that "We limited our attention to nominal predicates with unambiguous role sets". At first glance, I considered this as too restricting given that most frequent predicates are ambiguous. Now, I have discovered that just 595 out of 4705 predicates in NomBank are considered ambiguous (e.g. way.01=" | ||
+ | |||
+ | * The description of feature 10 in Table 2 ("Head word of // | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== What do we like about the paper ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * clever way of exploiting coreference chains | ||
+ | * [[http:// | ||
+ | * considering IAA (inter annotator agreement) and measuring [[http:// | ||
+ | |||
+ | Written by --- // | ||
- | To be continued... | ||