This paper describes a system for extracting typed dependency parses of English sentences from phrase structure parses. In order to capture inherent relations occurring in corpus texts that can be critical in real-world applications, many NP relations are included in the set of grammatical relations used. We provide a comparison of our system with Minipar and the Link parser. The typed dependency extraction facility described here is integrated in the Stanford Parser, available for download.

Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Anna N. Rafferty and Christopher D. Manning Linguistics Department Computer Science Department Stanford University Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 Stanford, CA 94305 {rafferty,manning}@stanford.edu [email protected]..

number of hidden categories is not fixed, but when the number of hidden states is unknown (Beal et al., 2002; Teh et al., 2006). can grow with the amount of training data.

Discriminative feature-based methods are widely used in natural language processing, but sentence parsing is still dominated by generative methods. While prior feature-based dynamic programming parsers have restricted training and evaluation to artificially short sentences, we present the first general, featurerich discriminative parser, based on a conditional random field model, which has been successfully scaled to the full WSJ parsing data. Our efficiency is primarily due to the use of stochastic optimization techniques, as well as parallelization and chart prefiltering. On WSJ15, (...) we attain a state-of-the-art F-score of 90.9%, a 14% relative reduction in error over previous models, while being two orders of magnitude faster. On sentences of length 40, our system achieves an F-score of 89.0%, a 36% relative reduction in error over a generative baseline. (shrink)

This paper presents the first use of a computational model of natural logic—a system of logical inference which operates over natural language—for textual inference. Most current approaches to the PAS- CAL RTE textual inference task achieve robustness by sacrificing semantic precision; while broadly effective, they are easily confounded by ubiquitous inferences involving monotonicity. At the other extreme, systems which rely on first-order logic and theorem proving are precise, but excessively brittle. This work aims at a middle way. Our system finds (...) a low-cost edit sequence which transforms the premise into the hypothesis; learns to classify entailment relations across atomic edits; and composes atomic entailments into a top-level entailment judgment. We provide the first reported results for any system on the FraCaS test suite. We also evaluate on RTE3 data, and show that hybridizing an existing RTE system with our natural logic system yields significant performance gains. (shrink)

We propose an approach to natural language inference based on a model of natural logic, which identifies valid inferences by their lexical and syntactic features, without full semantic interpretation. We greatly extend past work in natural logic, which has focused solely on semantic containment and monotonicity, to incorporate both semantic exclusion and implicativity. Our system decomposes an inference problem into a sequence of atomic edits linking premise to hypothesis; predicts a lexical entailment relation for each edit using a statistical classifier; (...) propagates these relations upward through a syntax tree according to semantic properties of intermediate nodes; and composes the resulting entailment relations across the edit sequence. We evaluate our system on the FraCaS test suite, and achieve a 27% reduction in error from previous work. We also show that hybridizing an existing RTE system with our natural logic system yields significant gains on the RTE3 test suite. (shrink)

separated from evaluating entailment. Current approaches to semantic inference in question answer-.

mentation for languages such as Chinese. Almost no NLP task is truly standalone. The end-to-end performance of natural Most current systems for higher-level, aggre-.

Ben Taskar Dan Klein Michael Collins Computer Science Dept. Computer Science Dept. CS and AI Lab Stanford University Stanford University.