Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
user:zeman:treebanks:hi [2011/12/06 17:58] zeman Hindi test data sample. |
user:zeman:treebanks:hi [2012/10/02 16:13] zeman HTB 0.5 for the 2012 shared task. |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
* CoNLL format | * CoNLL format | ||
* ICON 2010 | * ICON 2010 | ||
+ | * Shakti Standard Format (SSF; native) | ||
+ | * CoNLL format | ||
+ | * HPST 2012 (MTPIL workshop COLING 2012; this version is also called HTB (Hindi Treebank) 0.5) | ||
* Shakti Standard Format (SSF; native) | * Shakti Standard Format (SSF; native) | ||
* CoNLL format | * CoNLL format | ||
- | There has been no official release of the treebank yet. There have been two as-is sample releases for the purposes of the NLP tools contests in parsing Indian languages, attached to the [[http:// | + | There has been no official release of the treebank yet. There have been three as-is sample releases for the purposes of the NLP tools contests in parsing Indian languages, attached to the [[http:// |
==== Obtaining and License ==== | ==== Obtaining and License ==== | ||
- | There is no standard distribution channel for the treebank after the ICON 2010 evaluation period. Inquire at the LTRC (ltrc (at) iiit (dot) ac (dot) in) about the possibility of getting the data. The ICON 2010 license in short: | + | There is no standard distribution channel for the treebank after the shared task evaluation period. Inquire at the LTRC (ltrc (at) iiit (dot) ac (dot) in) about the possibility of getting the data. The ICON 2010 and HPST 2012 license in short: |
* non-commercial research usage | * non-commercial research usage | ||
Line 39: | Line 42: | ||
==== Domain ==== | ==== Domain ==== | ||
- | Unknown. | + | News domain corpus from ISI Kolkata. |
==== Size ==== | ==== Size ==== | ||
- | HyDT-Bangla shows dependencies between chunks, not words. The node/tree ratio is thus much lower than in other treebanks. The ICON 2009 version came with a data split into three parts: training, development and test: | + | HyDT-Hindi contains |
^ Part ^ Sentences ^ Chunks ^ Ratio ^ | ^ Part ^ Sentences ^ Chunks ^ Ratio ^ | ||
- | | Training | 980 | 6449 | 6.58 | | + | | Training | |
- | | Development | 150 | 811 | 5.41 | | + | | Development | 150 | 1250 | 8.33 | |
- | | Test | 150 | 961 | 6.41 | | + | | Test | |
- | | TOTAL | 1280 | 8221 | 6.42 | | + | | TOTAL | 1801 | |
- | The ICON 2010 version came with a data split into three parts: training, development and test: | + | The ICON 2010 version came with a data split into three parts: training, development and test. The intra-chunk dependencies have been added: |
^ Part ^ Sentences ^ Chunks ^ Ratio ^ Words ^ Ratio ^ | ^ Part ^ Sentences ^ Chunks ^ Ratio ^ Words ^ Ratio ^ | ||
- | | Training | 979 | 6440 | 6.58 | 10305 | 10.52 | | + | | Training | |
- | | Development | 150 | 812 | 5.41 | 1196 | 7.97 | | + | | Development | |
- | | Test | 150 | 961 | 6.41 | 1350 | 9.00 | | + | | Test | 321 | | | 6588 | 20.52 | |
- | | TOTAL | 1279 | 8213 | 6.42 | 12851 | 10.04 | | + | | TOTAL | 3836 | | | |
- | I have counted the sentences and chunks. The number of words comes from (Husain et al., 2010). Note that the paper gives the number of training sentences as 980 (instead of 979), which is a mistake. The last training sentence has the id 980 but there is no sentence with id 418. | + | I have counted the sentences and tokens (words) on the '' |
- | Apparently the training-development-test | + | The HTB 0.5 (2012) version came with a data split into three parts: |
+ | |||
+ | ^ Part ^ Sentences ^ Chunks ^ Ratio ^ Words ^ Ratio ^ | ||
+ | | Training | 12041 | | | 268093 | 22.27 | | ||
+ | | Development | 1233 | | | 26416 | 21.42 | | ||
+ | | Test | | | | | | | ||
+ | | TOTAL | | | | | | | ||
==== Inside ==== | ==== Inside ==== | ||
- | * Broken characters ('' | + | HTB 0.5 is distributed |
- | + | ||
- | -- | + | |
- | + | ||
- | The text uses the [[http:// | + | |
- | + | ||
- | The CoNLL format contains only the chunk heads. The native SSF format shows the other words in the chunk, too, but it does not capture intra-chunk dependency relations. This is an example of a multi-word chunk: | + | |
- | < | + | //The rest of this section applies to the ICON datasets. It may or may not still be valid for HTB 0.5.// |
- | 3.1 | + | |
- | 3.2 | + | |
- | 3.3 | + | |
- | ))</code> | + | |
- | In the CoNLL format, the CPOS column contains | + | The text uses the [[http:// |
Occasionally there are '' | Occasionally there are '' | ||
Line 85: | Line 84: | ||
The [[http:// | The [[http:// | ||
- | According to [[http:// | + | According to [[http:// |
- | Note: There have been cycles in the Hindi part of HyDT but no such problem occurs in the Bengali part. | + | Note: There have been cycles in the Hindi part of HyDT. |
==== Sample ==== | ==== Sample ==== | ||
Line 603: | Line 602: | ||
==== Parsing ==== | ==== Parsing ==== | ||
- | Nonprojectivities in HyDT-Bangla | + | Nonprojectivities in HyDT-Hindi are not frequent. Only 862 of the 77068 chunks in the training+development ICON 2010 version are attached nonprojectively (1.12%). |
- | The results of the ICON 2009 NLP tools contest have been published in [[http:// | + | The results of the ICON 2009 NLP tools contest have been published in [[http:// |
^ Parser (Authors) ^ LAS ^ UAS ^ | ^ Parser (Authors) ^ LAS ^ UAS ^ | ||
- | | Kolkata (De et al.)* | 84.29 | 90.32 | | + | | Hyderabad (Ambati et al.) | 79.33 | 90.22 | |
- | | Hyderabad (Ambati et al.) | 78.25 | 90.22 | | + | | Malt (Nivre) | 78.20 | 89.36 | |
- | | Malt (Nivre) | 76.07 | 88.97 | | + | | Malt+MST (Zeman) | 73.88 | 88.49 | |
- | | Malt+MST (Zeman) | 71.49 | 86.89 | | + | | Mannem | 76.90 | 88.06 | |
- | | Mannem | 70.34 | 83.56 | | + | |
- | The results of the ICON 2010 NLP tools contest have been published in [[http:// | + | The results of the ICON 2010 NLP tools contest have been published in [[http:// |
^ Parser (Authors) ^ LAS ^ UAS ^ | ^ Parser (Authors) ^ LAS ^ UAS ^ | ||
- | | Attardi et al. | 70.66 | 87.41 | | + | | Attardi et al. | 87.49 | 94.78 | |
- | | Kosaraju et al. | 70.55 | 86.16 | | + | | Kosaraju et al. | 88.63 | 94.54 | |
- | | Kolachina et al. | 70.14 | 87.10 | | + | | Kolachina et al. | 86.22 | 93.25 | |