/
Some Advances in Transformation-Based Part of Speech Taggin Some Advances in Transformation-Based Part of Speech Taggin

Some Advances in Transformation-Based Part of Speech Taggin - PowerPoint Presentation

jane-oiler
jane-oiler . @jane-oiler
Follow
403 views
Uploaded On 2017-06-23

Some Advances in Transformation-Based Part of Speech Taggin - PPT Presentation

Eric Brill A Maximum Entropy Approach to Identifying Sentence Boundaries Jeffrey C Reynar and Adwait Ratnaparkhi Presenter Sawood Alam ltsalamcsoduedugt Some Advances in TransformationBased Part of Speech Tagging ID: 562721

based word noun suffix word based suffix noun tag tagged tagging common words preceding change unknown results verb accuracy

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Some Advances in Transformation-Based Pa..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Some Advances in Transformation-Based Part of Speech Tagging

Eric Brill

A Maximum Entropy Approach to Identifying Sentence Boundaries

Jeffrey C. Reynar and Adwait Ratnaparkhi

Presenter

Sawood

Alam

<salam@cs.odu.edu>Slide2

Some Advances in Transformation-Based Part of Speech Tagging

Spoken Language Systems Group Laboratory for Computer Science Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139brill@goldilocks.lcs.mit.eduSlide3

Introduction

Stochastic taggingTrainable rule-based taggerRelevant linguistic information with simple non-stochastic rulesLexical relationship in tagging

Rule-based approach to tagging unknown wordsExtended into a k-best taggerSlide4

Markov-Model Based Taggers

Tag sequence that maximizesProb(word|tag) *

Prob(tag|previous n tags)Slide5

Stochastic Tagging

Avoid laborious manual rule constructionLinguistic information is only captured indirectlySlide6

Transformation-Based Error-Driven LearningSlide7

An Earlier Transformation-Based Tagger

Initially assign most likely tag based on training corpus

Unknown word is tagged based on some featuresChange tag a to b when:The preceding/following word is tagged zThe word two before/after is tagged zOne of the two/three preceding/following words is tagged zThe preceding word is tagged z and the following word is tagged wThe preceding/following word is tagged z and the word two before/after is tagged w

Example: change from noun to verb if previous word is a modalSlide8

Lexicalizing the Tagger

Change tag a to tag b when:The preceding/following word is wThe word two before/after is w

One of the two preceding/following words is wThe current word is w and the preceding/following word is xThe current word is w and the preceding/following word is tagged zExample: changefrom preposition to adverb if the word two positions to the right is "as“from non-3rd person singular present verb to base form verb if one of the previous two words is "n’t"Slide9

Comparison of Tagging Accuracy With No Unknown Words

Method

Training Corpus Size (Words)# of Rules or Context. Probs.Acc. (%)Stochastic

64 K6,17096.3Stochastic1 Million10,00096.7Rule-Based w/o Lex. Rules

600 K

219

96.9

Rule-Based With

Lex

. Rules

600 K

267

97.2Slide10

Unknown Words

Change the tag of an unknown word (from X) to Y if:Deleting the prefix x, |x| <= 4, results in a word (x is any string of length 1 to 4)The first (1,2,3,4) characters of the word are x

Deleting the suffix x, |x| <= 4, results in a wordThe last (1,2,3,4) characters of the word are xAdding the character string x as a suffix results in a word (|x| <= 4)Adding the character string x as a prefix results in a word (|x| <= 4)Word W ever appears immediately to the left/right of the wordCharacter Z appears in the wordSlide11

Unknown Words Learning

Change tag:From common noun to plural common noun if the word has suffix "-s"

From common noun to number if the word has character ". "From common noun to adjective if the word has character "-"From common noun to past participle verb if the word has suffix "-ed"From common noun to gerund or present participle verb if the word has suffix "-ing"To adjective if adding the suffix "-ly

" results in a wordTo adverb if the word has suffix "-ly"From common noun to number if the word "$" ever appears immediately to the leftFrom common noun to adjective if the word has suffix "-al"From noun to base form verb if the word "would" ever appears immediately to the leftSlide12

K-Best Tags

Modify "change" to "add" in the transformation templatesSlide13

k-Best Tagging Results

# of Rules

AccuracyAvg. # of tags per word096.51.00

5096.91.0210097.41.0415097.9

1.10

200

98.4

1.19

250

99.1

1.50Slide14

Future Work

Apply these techniques to other problemsLearning pronunciation networks for speech recognitionLearning mappings between sentences and semantic representationsSlide15

A Maximum Entropy Approach to Identifying Sentence Boundaries

Jeffrey C. Reynar and Adwait Ratnaparkhi

Department of Computer and Information ScienceUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania~ USA{jcreynar, adwait}@unagi.cis.upenn.eduSlide16

Introduction

Many freely available natural language processing tools require their input to be divided into sentences, but make no mention of how to accomplish this.Punctuation marks, such as ., ?, and ! might be ambiguous.Issues with abbreviations:

E.g. The president lives in Washington, D.C.Slide17

Previous Work

to disambiguate sentence boundaries they usea decision tree (99.8% accuracy on Brown corpus) or

a neural network (98.5% accuracy on WSJ corpus)Slide18

Approach

Potential sentence boundary (., ? and !)Contextual informationThe PrefixThe Suffix

The presence of particular characters in the Prefix or SuffixWhether the Candidate is an honorific (e.g. Ms., Dr., Gen.)Whether the Candidate is a corporate designator (e.g. Corp., S.p.A., L.L.C.)Features of the word left/right of the CandidateList of abbreviationsSlide19

Maximum Entropy

H(p) = - Σp(b,c) log p(b,c

)Under following constraints:Σ p(b,c) * fj(b,c) = Σ

p'(b,c) * fj(b,c), 1 <= j <= kp(yes|c) > 0.5p(yes|c) = p(yes|c) / (p(

yes|c

) + p(

no|c

))Slide20

System Performance

WJS

BrownSentences2047851672

Candidate P. Marks3217361282Accuracy98.8%97.9%False Positives201

750

False Negatives

171

506Slide21

Conclusions

Achieved comparable (to state-of-the-art systems) accuracy with far less resources.