Elamur Research⌕
☰
home / papers / 2015 / Robust Part-of-speech Tagging of Arabic Text

Robust Part-of-speech Tagging of Arabic Text

Paper · 2015 · Hanan Aldarmaki and Mona Diab

Summary

The paper tackles part-of-speech tagging for Modern Standard Arabic. Its rich clitic morphology and the many words that never appear in training make simple taggers brittle. The authors start from MD-AMIRA, a fast cascaded pipeline inside the MADAMIRA suite. It runs three linear SVM steps in sequence: character-level clitic segmentation, a classifier that restores underlying forms, and token-level tagging with a fine-grained tagset called ERTS2. To this baseline they add external knowledge, and call the result MD-AMIRA+EX. The additions are candidate tags and morphological attributes from the ALMOR analyzer, optional soft output constraints, and word-cluster IDs (Brown and word2vec K-means) learned from a large unlabeled newswire corpus. On the held-out ATB newswire test set the enhanced tagger reaches 97.15%, beating MD-MADA's 96.91% while running about 30% faster. Accuracy on unseen words also rises sharply. On cross-genre text it trails MD-MADA slightly, mainly because of segmentation mistakes. The work shows that a simple linear model, fed well-chosen resource-derived features, can rival a heavier analysis-and-ranking system.

Key points

  • Results on the ATB1-2-3 held-out test set:

    ModelOverall accuracyUnseen-word accuracySpeed (tokens/sec)
    MD-AMIRA96.78%73.38%~2415
    MD-AMIRA+EX97.15%89.22%~1395
    MD-MADA96.91%85.28%~1050

    With broad tags, MD-AMIRA+EX reaches 98.24%.

  • Results on cross-genre data: MD-AMIRA+EX scores 94.38% versus 94.71% for MD-MADA. With gold tokenization MD-AMIRA+EX rises to 95.4%, and on the main test set gold tokenization gives 97.64%.

  • Segmentation is a character-level IOB task with prefix, word and suffix segments. Normalization is a separate token-level classifier with three labels: CIP (trailing t→p), CIY (trailing y/A→Y) and NA.

  • The biggest single gain came from using a few top candidate tags from ALMOR as features. ALMOR's morphological attributes and the soft constraints added little on top of those tags. Cluster IDs still helped, especially for unseen words and other genres.

  • On proper nouns MD-AMIRA+EX makes fewer errors than MD-MADA:

    • mistagged as adjective: 69 vs 125;
    • mistagged as verb: 50 vs 107.

Interesting ideas

  • I1. Instead of letting a morphological analyzer hard-filter the output, the paper feeds its top few candidate tags to the classifier as ordinary features, which gave most of the benefit; once that was done, extra constraints became redundant.
  • I2. Splitting clitics is treated as per-character B/I/O labelling, followed by a separate small classifier that restores the underlying form of a stem changed by affixation.
  • I3. Cluster IDs learned from plain unlabeled text give a linear model a cheap handle on words it never saw in labelled data, and this help persisted across genres.
  • I4. The evaluation re-runs the tagger on gold tokenization, reports unseen-word accuracy separately and adds a cross-genre test set, which pins down how much error is inherited from the upstream step.
  • I5. A very fine-grained tagset is predicted once and then collapsed deterministically into broad classes, so a single model serves several consumers.

For Mova

How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests:

  • I1 (tokens): our English tagger could take lexicon or morphology candidate tags as features rather than hard masks, keeping decisions soft and the evidence traceable.
  • I2 (tokens): the same two-step design fits English contractions and possessives ("won't" → will + n't, "'s"), keeping segmentation and form restoration as separately explainable steps.
  • I3 (tokens): Brown-style cluster features could back off the perceptron tagger on rare or out-of-domain words without making it a black box.
  • I4 (learn): every pipeline stage could be scored both on gold and on predicted input, so regressions are attributed to the right component.
  • I5 (tree): predicting rich XPOS-style tags and mapping them down to UPOS lets the parser and treebank conversion share one tagger output.

Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.

 Institutions

 Fields, topics and concepts

Cite

Cite as Hanan Aldarmaki and Mona Diab. 2015. Robust Part-of-speech Tagging of Arabic Text. Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Arabic Natural Language Processing.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.18653/v1/w15-3222

@inproceedings{aldarmaki2015robust,
  title = {{Robust Part-of-speech Tagging of Arabic Text}},
  author = {Hanan Aldarmaki and Mona Diab},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Arabic Natural Language Processing},
  year = {2015},
  doi = {10.18653/v1/w15-3222},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/w15-3222}
}

References

18 references, 7 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. P. F. Brown, P. V. deSouza, R. L. Mercer, V. J. D. Pietra, and J. C. Lai. Class-based n-gram models of natural language. Computational Linguistics, 18(4):467-479, 1992. ↗
  2. M. Diab, K. Hacioglu, and D. Jurafsky. Automatic tagging of arabic text: From raw text to base phrase chunks. In Proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2004: Short Papers , pages 149152. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2004.
  3. M. Diab. Improved Arabic base phrase chunking with a new enriched pos tag set. In Proceedings of the 2007 Workshop on Computational Approaches to Semitic Languages.
  4. M. Diab. Second generation amira tools for arabic processing: Fast and robust tokenization, pos tagging, and base phrase chunking. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Arabic Language Resources and Tools , pages 285288, 2009. find
  5. Q.X. Do and D. Roth. Constraints based taxonomic relation classification. In Proceedings of EMNLP2010 , pages 10991109. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2010. find
  6. A. El Kholy and N. Habash. Techniques for Arabic morphological detokenization and orthographic denormalization. In LREC 2010 Workshop on Language Resources and Human Language Technology for Semitic Languages. find
  7. Rong-En Fan, Kai-Wei Chang, Cho-Jui Hsieh, Xiang-Rui Wang, and Chih-Jen Lin. LIBLINEAR: A Library for Large Linear Classification. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9:18711874. 2008. ↗
  8. David Graff. Arabic Gigaword, LDC Catalog No.: LDC2003T12. Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania. 2003. find
  9. N. Habash and O. Rambow. Arabic tokenization, part-of-speech tagging and morphological disambiguation in one fell swoop. In Proceedings of the ACL-05 , pages 573580. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2005.
  10. N. Habash, and F. Sadat. Arabic Preprocessing Schemes for Statistical Machine Translation. In Proceedings of the 7th Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics/Human Language Technologies Conference (HLT-NAACL06), p. 4952, New York, NY. 2006.
  11. N, Habash, A. Soudi, and T. Buckwalter. On Arabic Transliteration. In A. van den Bosch and A. Soudi, editors, Arabic Computational Mor- phology: Knowledge-based and Empirical Methods. Springer (2007). ↗
  12. N. Habash. Arabic morphological representations for machine translation. In A. van den Bosch, A. Soudi (Eds.), Arabic Computational Morphology: Knowledge-based and Empirical Methods, Springer (2007). ↗
  13. M. Maamouri, A. Bies, and T. Buckwalter. The penn arabic treebank : Building a large- scale annotated arabic corpus. In NEMLAR Confer- ence on Arabic Language Resources and Tools, Cairo, Egypt. 2004. find
  14. T. Mikolov, K. Chen, G. Corrado, and J. Dean. Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Space. In Proceedings of Workshop at ICLR, 2013. ↗
  15. S. Kopru. An efficient part-of-speech tagger for arabic. In Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing , pages 202213, 2011. find
  16. A. Pasha, M. Al-Badrashiny, M. Diab, A. El Kholy, R. Eskander, N. Habash, M. Pooleery, O. Rambow, and R. Roth. MADAMIRA: A Fast, Comprehensive Tool for Morphological Analysis and Disambiguation of Arabic. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2014).
  17. V. Punyakanok, D. Roth, W. Yih, and D. Zimak. Learning and inference over constrained output. In IJCAI , pages 11241129, 2005. find
  18. R. Roth, O. Rambow, N. Habash, M. Diab, and C. Rudin. Arabic morphological tagging, diacritization, and lemmatization using lexeme models and feature ranking. In Proceedings of ACL-08: HLT, Short Papers , pages 117120, 2008.

Updated

↑ back to top

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/aldarmaki-2015-robust-part-speech-tagging-arabic/