[ Skip to the content ]

Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics Wiki

[ Back to the navigation ]

You are here: start » diskurz_doporucena_literatura

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision 		Previous revision
Next revision Both sides next revision
diskurz_doporucena_literatura [2012/02/08 15:40]
ufal vytvořeno 		diskurz_doporucena_literatura [2012/03/12 08:30]
hladka
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 Sem si můžeme psát odkazy na články (především) o diskurzu, které nás zaujaly a které doporučujeme k přečtení i ostatním, např. takto: Sem si můžeme psát odkazy na články (především) o diskurzu, které nás zaujaly a které doporučujeme k přečtení i ostatním, např. takto:
 +   * Rodger Kibble, Richard Power. 2004. Optimizing referential coherence in text generation. //Computational linguistics//, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 401-416. [[http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/J/J04/J04-4001.pdf|pdf]] **Abstract**
 +This article describes an implemented system which uses centering theory for planning of coherent
 +texts and choice of referring expressions. We argue that text and sentence planning need to be
 +driven in part by the goal of maintaining referential continuity and thereby facilitating pronoun
 +resolution: Obtaining a favorable ordering of clauses, and of arguments within clauses, is likely
 +to increase opportunities for nonambiguous pronoun use. Centering theory provides the basis for
 +such an integrated approach. Generating coherent texts according to centering theory is treated
 +as a constraint satisfaction problem. The well-known Rule 2 of centering theory is reformulated in
 +terms of a set of constraints—cohesion, salience, cheapness, and continuity—and we show sample
 +outputs obtained under a particular weighting of these constraints. This framework facilitates
 +detailed research into evaluation metrics and will therefore provide a productive research tool in
 +addition to the immediate practical benefit of improving the fluency and readability of generated
 +texts. The technique is generally applicable to natural language generation systems, which perform
 +hierarchical text structuring based on a theory of coherence relations with certain additional
 +assumptions.
  
 +   *Florian Wolf, Edward Gibson. 2005. Representing Discourse Coherence: A Corpus-Based Study. //Computational Linguistics//, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 249--287. [[http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/J/J05/J05-2005.pdf|pdf]] 
 +   *Rashmi Prasad, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Eleni Miltsakaki, Livio Robaldo, Aravind Joshi, Bonnie Webber. 2008. The Penn Discourse TreeBank 2.0. In //Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008)// [[http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~pdtb/papers/pdtb-lrec08.pdf]] 
 +**Abstract** 
 +We present the second version of the Penn Discourse Treebank, PDTB-2.0, describing its lexically-grounded annotations of discourse 
 +relations and their two abstract object arguments over the 1 million word Wall Street Journal corpus. We describe all aspects of the 
 +annotation, including (a) the argument structure of discourse relations, (b) the sense annotation of the relations, and (c) the attribution 
 +of discourse relations and each of their arguments. We list the differences between PDTB-1.0 and PDTB-2.0. We present representative 
 +statistics for several aspects of the annotation in the corpus.

[ Back to the navigation ] [ Back to the content ]