building deep dependency structures with a wide-coverage ccg parser
Post on 14-Jan-2016
32 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Building deep dependency structures with a wide-coverage CCG parser
Stephen ClarkACL2002발표자 : 박 경 미
목차
abstract 1 introduction 2 the grammar 3 the probability model
3.1 estimating the dependency probabilities 4 the parser 5 experiments 6 results 7 conclusions and further work
abstract
To derive dependency structures Describes a wide-coverage statistical parser that uses Co
mbinatory Categorial Grammar (CCG) In capturing the long-range dependencies
A CCG parser differs from most existing wide-coverage tree-bank parsers
A set of dependency structures used for training and testing the parser Is obtained from a treebank of CCG normal-form
Have been derived (semi-) automatically from the Penn Treebank
1. introduction
Models based on lexical dependencies The dependencies are typically derived from a
context-free phrase structure tree Using simple head percolation heuristics
Does not work well for the long-range dependencies CCG
“mildly context-sensitive” formalism Provides the most linguistically satisfactory account
of the dependencies Is to facilitate recovery of unbounded dependencies
1. introduction
CCG is unlike other formalisms In that the standard predicate-argument relations can
be derived via non-standard surface derivations Non-standard surface derivations
impacts on how best to define a probability model for CCG
the “spurious ambiguity” of CCG derivations may lead to an exponential number of derivations
Some of the spurious derivations may not be present in the training data
One solution is to consider only the normal-form derivation
1. introduction
Another problem with the non-standard surface derivations Is that the standard PARSEVAL performance measures ove
r such derivations are uninformative Lin(1995) and Carroll et al.(1998)
Propose recovery of head-dependencies characterising predicate-argument relations as a meaningful measure
The training and testing material for CCG parser Is a treebank of dependency structures
Have been derived from a set of CCG derivations developed for use with another (normal-form) CCG parse
2 the grammar
결합 범주 문법 ( 어휘 사전 , 구문 범주 형태 ) identify a lexical item as either a functor or argument
For the functors The category specifies the type and directionality of the argum
ents and the type of the result Ex) the category for the transitive verb bought
The slash determines that the argument is respectively to the right (/) or to the left ( \ ) of the functor
Its first argument as a noun phrase (NP) to its right Its second argument as an NP to its left Its result as a sentence
2 the grammar
Extend CCG categories To express category features, and head-word and depen
dency information
The feasure [dcl] specifies the category’s S result as a declarative sentence
bought identifies its head The numbers denote dependency relations
2 the grammar
Using a small set of typed combinatory rules Derivation
Underlines indicating combinatory reduction Arrows indicating the direction of the application X/Y Y : X/Y 가 뒤의 Y 와 결합하여 X 가 된다 . ( 순행 연산 ) Y X/Y : X/Y 가 앞의 Y 와 결합하여 X 가 된다 . ( 역행 연산 )
2 the grammar
A dependency is defined as a 4-tuple: <hf, f, s, ha> hf is the head word of the functor f is the functor category s is the argument slot ha is the head word of the argument Ex) the object dependency yielded by the first step of (3)
2 the grammar
Variables Be used to denote heads Be used via unifications to pass head information
from one category to another Ex) the expanded category for the control verb
persuade
Ex) I persuaded him to go to the party The head of the infinitival complement’s subject
Is identified with the head of the object Unification “passes” the head of the object to the
subject of the infinitival
2 the grammar Raising
A syntactic process by which a NP or other element is moved from a SC into the structure of the larger clause Ex) I believe [him to be honest] → I believe him [to be honest]
The kinds of lexical items that use the head passing mechanism Are raising, auxiliary and control verbs, modifiers, and
relative pronouns The relative pronoun category
Show how heads are co-indexed for object-extraction
2 the grammar
Type-rasing (T) and functional composition (B), along with co-indexing of heads Mediate transmission of the head of the NP the company ont
o the object of buy
2 the grammar
With the convention that arcs point away from arguments The relevant argument slot in the functor category labels
the arcs Encode the subject argument of the to category as a dep
endency relation (Marks is a “subject” of to) To encode every argument as a dependency
3 The probability model
Cm
ih
SChPSCDP
iX
XcPSCP
SCDPSCPSDCPP
mihsfhD
cccC
DC
twtwtwS
i
i
ii
a
ani
i
iini
aiif
n
nn
sequencecategory by the entailed esdependenci ofnumber theis
dependencyth theofslot argument thefilling wordhead theis
),|(),|( (9)
tlyindependen filled is sequencecategory in theslot argument each that assume
th word for thecontext local theis
)|()|( )8(
),|()|()|,()( (7)
esdependenci ofset theis },...1|,,,{
words the toassigned categories of sequence theis ...,
pair , a is structure dependencyA
,,...,,, Sentence
1
1
21
2211
3.1 estimating the dependency probabilities
W is the set of words in the data C is the set of lexical categories
3.1 estimating the dependency probabilities
)( ofmean geometric a
off-back of levelsfour : problem data sparse
),,,|( )|()(
factorion normalisat theignore
headargument theofcategory lexical theis
),,,|(
),,,|(),|( )11(
),,,(
),,,,(),,,|( )10(
),,,|(y probabilit theof estimatefrequency relative the
1
1
p
chfhRFXcPP
ac
cwfhRF
chfhRFSChP
dcbaC
dcbaRCdcbaRF
dcbaRF
iii
i
i
iii
i
aaifiini
ia
jjifnj
aaifa
4 The parser
Parser 는 2 가지 단계에서 문장을 분석 1. 문장의 각 단어에 category 할당
supertagger(Clark, 2002) : category 확률이 constant factor β 안에 있는 모든 category 할당
문장에 대해 여러가지 category sequence 가 가능 Parser 에 의해 return 될 category sequence 는 확률 모델에
의해 결정됨 Supertagger 의 2 가지 역할
1. parser 의 search space 줄여줌 2. Category sequence model 제공
)|()|( 1 iini XcPSCP
4 The parser
Supertagger 는 “ category dictionary” 참조 data 에서 관찰된 category 집합을 각 단어마다 가짐
2. CKY bottom-up chart-parsing algorithm 적용 Parser 가 사용한 결합 규칙 , 대등 규칙
Type-raising, generalised forward composition…… Type-raising : category NP, PP, S[adj] \ NP( 형용사구 ) 에
적용됨 NP, PP, S[adj] \ NP 가 발견되면 chart 에 미리 정의된 ty
pe-raised category 추가 type-raised category 집합은 CCGbank section 02-21 의
빈번하게 발생한 type-raising rule 에 기반함 8 type-raised categories for NP 2 categories each for PP and S[adj] \ NP
4 The parser Parser 는 또한 lexical rule 사용
CCGbank section 02-21 에서 200 번 이상 발생한 것들 Ex) ing 형태의 동사구로부터 명사를 수식하는 어구 만들기
Comma 에 관한 규칙도 사용 Ex) comma 를 conjunct 로 다룸
John likes apples, bananas and pears NP object 가 3 가지 head 를 가짐 , 모두 like 의 직접
목적어 Parser 의 search space 와 통계 모델
If there is not already a constituent with the same head word, same category, and some DS with a higher of equal score
If the score for its dependency structure is within some factor α A constituent is only placed in a chart cell
xx NPNPNPingS \\][ )12(
5 experiments
말뭉치 Training : section 02-21 of the CCGbank (39,161) Development : section 00 (1,901) Testing : section 23 (2,379) Category set : section 02-21 (10 번 이상 , 398)
Estimating the probabilities P(C|S) 의 estimate : CCGbank 로부터 직접 획득 To obtain dependencies for estimating P(D|C,S)
Tree 에 대해 derivation 동안 적용된 결합 규칙들을 찾고 dependency 를 출력
Increased the coverage on sec23 to 99%(2,352) By identifying the cause of the parse failures and adding the a
dditional rules and categories
5 experiments
Initial parser β=0.01 for the supertagger (an average of 3.8 c/w) K=20 for the category dictionary α=0.001 for the parser 2,098 of the 2,352 sentences
received analysis, with 206 timing out and 48 failing If any sentence took longer than 2 CPU minutes to parse
48 no-analysis case : K=100 증가 , 23 문장 분석 206 time-out case : β=0.05 증가 , 181 문장 분석
With 18 failing to parse, and 7 timing out Almost 98% of the 2,352 unseen sentences
6 results
To measure the performance of the parser Compared the dependencies output by the parser with those in th
e gold standard The category set distinguishes around 400 distinct types
Ex) tensed transitive buy is treated as a distinct category from infinitival transitive buy
More stringent (Penn Treebank 약 50 개 품사 태그 )
“distance measure” (Δ) : less useful The CCG grammar provides many of the constraints given by Δ, and d.
m. are biased against long-range dependencies
6 results
6 results 다른 parser 와의 비교 어렵다
Different data or different sets of dependencies The 24 cases of extracted objects in the gold-standard
that were passed down the object relative pronoun category
10 (41.7%) were recovered correctly by the parser 10 were incorrect because the wrong category was assigned to the relative
pronoun Reflect the fact that complementiser that is fifteen times as frequent a
s object relative pronoun that The suppertagger alone gets 74% of the o.r.p. correct
Dependency model is further biased against object extractions A first attempt at recovering these long-range dependencies
)/][/()\( XXX NPdclSNPNP
6 results
7 Conclusion and further work
Accurate, efficient wide-coverage parsing is possible with CCG
The parser is able to capture a number of long-range dependencies Is necessary for any parser that aims to support wide-
coverage semantic analysis Long-range dependency recovery 가 후처리 단계가 아니라
문법 , 파서와 통합된 과정 Building alternative structures that include the
long-range dependencies using better motivated probability models
top related