Differences

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

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+====== Keith Hall: Multilingual Dependency Parsing ======
+. 10. 2006
+Keith Hall (Center for Language and Speech Processing, Johns Hopkins
+University, USA)
+Multilingual Dependency Parsing and Applications
+[[ http://www.clsp.jhu.edu/~khall/talks/UFALSeminar.pdf | Slidy ]] [[ http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/~bejcek/SFL/sfl_2006-10-23_Hall--dep_parsing.wma | audio ]]
+Abstract: Dependency parsing has recently come to the forefront of
+interest in the statistical parsing community, culminating in the 2006
+CoNLL shared task on multilingual dependency parsing. Many of the
+competing teams made use of the Maximum Spanning Tree (MST) approach
+pioneered by McDonald and Ribarov (McDonald et al. '05).
+A disadvantage of the MST approach is that it requires structural scores
+to be derived from parent-child links. This constrains the parsing models
+to be based on very local structure; disallowing the explicit modeling of
+subcategorization and valency as well as far simpler constraints (compound
+adjectives, etc.).
+In this talk, I present a two-stage dependency parser which combines a
+K-best MST algorithm with a reranker. The advantage of such an approach is
+that the model used by the reranker includes features defined over entire
+tree structures. I present empirical results showing that "good" parses
+appear in the first 50 hypotheses generated by the heavily constrained MST
+models. Furthermore, I present reranking results that are competitive with
+the state-of-the-art parsers. Results are presented for a subset of the
+CoNLL competition languages as well as English.
+Finally, I will introduce a framework for the application of dependency
+parsing to tasks such as Speech Reconstruction and parsing of
+resource-poor languages.

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

Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics Wiki

Differences