Importance of linguistic constraints in statistical dependency parsing

0 downloads 236 Views 831KB Size Report
Importance of linguistic constraints in statistical dependency parsing. Bharat Ram Ambati,. Language Technologies Resear
Importance of linguistic constraints in statistical dependency parsing Bharat Ram Ambati, Language Technologies Research Centre, IIIT-Hyderabad, India.

Introduction

Motivation

• Parsing

• Machine Translation

– Major NLP task – Many Applications

Indian Language

Indian Language

Indian Language

English

• State-of-the-art dependency parsers – CoNLL-X, CoNLL-2007 Shared Tasks – ICON09 NLP Tools Contest

• Linguistic constraints – How to avoid multiple Subjects/Objects ?

Naive Approach (NA)

Probabilistic Approach (PA)

Approaches

Sentence

Sentence

Syntactic Dependency Tree

Syntactic Dependency Tree

How to extract k-best labels with probabilities?

Dependency Tree [T] (k-best labels for each node)

Dependency Tree [T] (k-best labels for each node)

Malt T has a verb with multiple Subj/Obj

Final Dependency Tree NO

• Modified implementation

T has a verb with multiple Subj/Obj

MST+MaxEnt • Used MaxEnt APIs

YES

Final Dependency Tree NO

YES

Extract multiple Subj/Obj of that verb

Extract multiple Subj/Obj of that verb

Assign Subj/Obj to the left most node

Assign Subj/Obj to node with highest prob.

Assign 2nd best label to the rest of the nodes

Assign 2nd best label to the rest of the nodes

Update k-best labels list

Update k-best labels list

Experiments Hindi

Czech

• Data

• Data – CoNLL-2007 Shared Task data – Test data: 286 sentences – Equivalent labels: ‘agent’ and ‘patient’

– ICON09 NLP Tools Contest data – Test data: 150 sentences – Equivalent labels: ‘k1’ and ‘k2’

• Multiple Subj/Obj instances

• Multiple Subj/Obj instances

– MaltPaser Output: 39 – MST+MaxEnt Output: 51

– MaltPaser Output: 38

• Results

• Results UAS

Malt LAS LS

MST+MAXENT UAS LAS LS

Baseline 90.14 74.48 76.38 91.26 90.14 74.57 76.38 91.26 NA 90.14 74.74 76.56 91.26 PA

72.75

75.26

72.84

75.26

73.36

75.87

Comparison of NA and PA with previous best results for Hindi

UAS

LAS

LS

Baseline

82.92

76.32

83.69

NA PA

82.92

75.92

83.35

82.92

75.97

83.40

Comparison of NA and PA with previous best results for Czech

Discussion

Future Work

• Probabilistic Approach better than Naive Approach

• All data-sets of CoNLL-X and CoNLL-2007 Shared Tasks

• Hindi

• Both MST and Malt

– 0.26% (Malt) and 0.61% (MST+MaxEnt) improvement – Better probability estimates using MxEnt

• Czech – No improvement – Limitation of libsvm learner of MaltParser

– libsvm and liblinear of Malt – MaxEnt labeler for MST

• Avoiding multiple instances of other labels • More linguistic constraints