/
Number or Nuance: Number or Nuance:

Number or Nuance: - PowerPoint Presentation

phoebe-click
phoebe-click . @phoebe-click
Follow
394 views
Uploaded On 2017-12-02

Number or Nuance: - PPT Presentation

Factors Affecting Reliable Word Sense Annotation Susan Windisch Brown Travis Rood and Martha Palmer University of Colorado at Boulder Annotators in their little nests agree And tis a shameful sight ID: 612010

sense senses grained fine senses sense fine grained set annotation granularity number ontonotes annotators restricted coarse instances word significant vary experiment 2007

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Number or Nuance:" 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

Number or Nuance: Factors Affecting Reliable Word Sense Annotation

Susan Windisch Brown, Travis Rood, and Martha PalmerUniversity of Colorado at BoulderSlide2

Annotators in their little nests agree;And ‘tis a shameful sight,When taggers on one projectFall out, and chide, and fight.

—[adapted from] Isaac WattsSlide3

Automatic word sense disambiguation

Lexical ambiguity is a significant problem in natural language processing (NLP) applications (Agirre & Edmonds, 2006)Text summarizationQuestion answeringWSD systems might help

Several studies show benefits for NLP tasks

(Sanderson, 2000;

Stokoe

, 2003;

Carpuat

and Wu, 2007; Chan, Ng and Chiang, 2007)But only with higher system accuracy (90%+)

3Slide4

Annotation reliability affects system accuracy

4WSD systemSystem Performance

Inter-annotator agreement

Sense Inventory

SensEval2

62.5%

70%

WordNet

Chen et al.

(2007)

82%

89%OntoNotes Palmer (2008)90%94%PropBank

Slide5

Senses for the verb control

5WordNetOntoNotes

1. exercise authoritative control or power over

1. exercise power or influence over; hold within limits

2. control (others or

oneself

) or influence skillfully

3. handle and cause to function

4. lessen the intensity of; temper

5. check or regulate (a scientific experiment) by conducting a parallel experiment

2. verify something by comparing to a standard

6. verify by using a duplicate register for comparison

7. be careful or certain to do something

8. have a firm understanding ofSlide6

Possible factors affecting the reliability of word sense annotation

6Fine-grained senses result in many senses per word, creating a heavy cognitive load on annotators, making accurate and consistent tagging difficultFine-grained senses are not distinct enough to reliably discriminate between Slide7

Requirements to compare fine-grained and coarse-grained annotation

7 Annotation of the same words on the same corpus instancesSense inventories differing only in sense granularity

Previous work

(Ng et al., 1999; Edmonds & Cotton, 2001;

Navigli

et al. 2007)Slide8

3 experiments8

40 verbsNumber of senses : 2-26Sense granularity: WordNet vs. OntoNotesExp. 1: confirm difference in reliability between fine- and coarse-grained annotation; vary granularity and number of sensesExp. 2: hold granularity constant; vary number of sensesExp. 3: hold number constant; vary granularitySlide9

Experiment 1Compare fine-grained sense inventory to coarse70

instances for each verb from the ON corpusAnnotated with WN senses by multiple pairs of annotatorsAnnotated with ON senses by multiple pairs of annotatorsCompare the ON ITAs to the WN ITAs9

Ave.

n

umber of senses

Granularity

OntoNotes

6.2

Coarse

WN

14.6

FineSlide10

Results10Slide11

ResultsCoarse-grained ON annotations had higher ITAs than fine-grained WN annotations

Number of sensesNo significant effect (t(79) = -1.28, p = .206). Sense nuance Yes, a significant effect (t(79) = 10.39, p < .0001).With number of senses held constant, coarse-grained annotation is 16.2 percentage points higher than fine-grained.

11Slide12

Experiment 2: Number of sensesHold sense granularity constant; vary # of senses

2 pairs of annotators, using fine-grained WN sensesFirst pair uses full set of WN senses for a wordSecond pair uses a restricted set on instances that we know should fit one of those senses12

Ave.

n

umber of senses

Granularity

WN

Full set

14.6

Fine

WN Restricted set

5.6FineSlide13

13

OntoNotes grouped sense B

OntoNotes grouped sense C

OntoNotes grouped sense A

WN 3 7 8

13 14

WN 9 10

WN 1 2 4 5

6 11 12Slide14

"Then I just bought plywood, drew the pieces on it and cut them out."

1. ----------------2. ----------------3. ----------------4. ----------------5. ----------------6. ----------------7. ----------------8. ----------------9. ----------------10. ----------------

11. ----------------

12. ----------------

13. ----------------

14. ----------------

3. ----------------

7. ----------------

8. ----------------

13. ----------------

14. ----------------

14Full set of WN sensesRestricted set of WN sensesSlide15

Results15Slide16

Experiment 3Number of senses controlled; vary sense granularity

Compare the ITAs for the ON tagging with the restricted-set WN tagging16

Ave.

n

umber of senses

Granularity

OntoNotes

6.2

Coarse

WN Restricted set

5.6

FineSlide17

Results17Slide18

Conclusion

Number of senses annotators must choose between: never a significant factorGranularity of the senses: a significant factor, with fine-grained senses leading to lower ITAsPoor reliability of fine-grained word sense annotation cannot be improved by reducing the cognitive load on annotators.Annotators cannot reliably discriminate between nuanced sense distinctions.

18Slide19

Acknowledgements

19 We gratefully acknowledge the efforts of all of the annotators and the support of the National Science Foundation Grants NSF-0415923, Word Sense Disambiguation and CISE-CRI-0551615, Towards a Comprehensive Linguistic Annotation and CISE-CRI 0709167, as well as a grant from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA/IPTO) under the GALE program, DARPA/CMO Contract No. HR0011-06-C-0022, a subcontract from BBN, Inc.Slide20

Restricted set annotation20

Use the adjudicated ON data to determine the ON sense for each instance.Use instances from experiment1 that were labeled with one selected ON sense (35 instances).Each restricted-set annotator saw only the WN senses that were clustered to form the appropriate ON sense.Compare to the full set annotation for those instances.