Elamur Research⌕
☰
home / papers / 1994 / RAFT/RAPR and Centering: a comparison and discussion of problems related to processing complex sentences

RAFT/RAPR and Centering: a comparison and discussion of problems related to processing complex sentences

Paper · 1994 · Linda Z. Suri and Kathleen McCoy

Summary

This squib compares two local focusing frameworks that propose antecedents for pronouns, which an inference component then confirms or rejects. The first is the authors' RAFT/RAPR (Revised Algorithms for Focus Tracking / Pronoun Resolution), which builds on Sidner's (1979) Focusing. The second is centering (Grosz, Joshi, and Weinstein 1983). A corpus-based evaluation is not yet feasible because neither framework fully specifies how to handle complex sentences, so the authors compare them in two ways.

First, they analyse constructed discourses of simple sentences. The frameworks often agree on non-initial text. Centering fails on discourse-initial examples and on one non-initial case because it tracks a single center, ignores the grammatical roles of pronouns and candidate antecedents, and remembers only the previous sentence.

Second, they collect native English speakers' judgments on sentences of the form "SX because SY." They use these to extend RAFT/RAPR and argue that centering cannot easily explain them.

The main lesson is that evaluating such algorithms requires handling complex sentences and clue words, not just processing clauses one after another.

Key points

  • RAFT/RAPR keeps two foci per sentence: the Current Focus (CF) and the Subject Focus (SF). It also keeps a Potential Focus List (PFL), a Potential Subject Focus List (PSFL), and stacks of all four structures across sentences.
  • The search order depends on the pronoun's role:
    • Nonsubject pronouns: the previous CF, then the SF, then the PFL, then stacked items.
    • Subject pronouns: the SF, then the CF, then the PSFL, then the stacks.
  • CF selection weighs several factors:
    • whether a candidate was mentioned before;
    • pronoun versus full NP realization;
    • a focus retention preference;
    • a preference for nonsubjects;
    • special forms such as there-insertion and clue words like "but."
  • Centering relies on one backward-looking center (Cb) and is meant to work within a discourse segment. RAFT/RAPR does not limit itself to segments.
  • The detailed analysis of "SX because SY" sentences comes from Suri's 1993 University of Delaware dissertation. The research was funded in part by NSF Grant #IRI-9010112.

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

🤝Educational Testing ServicePrinceton · United States27 works · 2,212 citations🎓University of DelawareNewark · United States20 works · 1,056 citations

 Fields, topics and concepts

📚 Shelves 4The field of science this work belongs to (OpenAlex fields).Computer Science · 16,667 worksArtificial Intelligence · 16,194 worksArts and Humanities · 16,039 worksLanguage and Linguistics · 15,891 works

Cite

Cite as Linda Z. Suri and Kathleen McCoy. 1994. RAFT/RAPR and Centering: a comparison and discussion of problems related to processing complex sentences. Computational Linguistics.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

@article{suri1994raft,
  title = {{RAFT/RAPR and Centering: a comparison and discussion of problems related to processing complex sentences}},
  author = {Linda Z. Suri and Kathleen McCoy},
  journal = {Computational Linguistics},
  year = {1994},
  url = {https://aclanthology.org/J94-2006/}
}

References

23 references, 4 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Brennan, Susan E. (1993). "Reference and local structure in interactive discourse." In Proceedings, Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania. find
  2. Brennan, Susan E.; Friedman, Marilyn W.; and Pollard, Carl J. (1987). "A centering approach to pronouns." In Proceedings, 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 155-162.
  3. Brown, Cheryl (1983). "Topic continuity in written English narrative." In Topic Continuity in Discourse, edited by T. Givon, 317-341. J. Benjamins. find
  4. Caramazza, Alfonso; Grober, Ellen; Garvey, Catherine; and Yates, Jack (1977). "Comprehension of anaphoric pronouns." Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 601-609. find
  5. Carter, David (1987). Interpreting Anaphors in Natural Language Texts. John Wiley and Sons. find
  6. Dahl, Deborah A. (1986). "Focusing and reference resolution in PUNDIT." In Proceedings, 1986 National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Philadelphia, PA, 1083-1088. find
  7. Grisham, John (1991). The Firm. Dell. find
  8. Grosz, Barbara J. (1981). "Focusing and description in natural language dialogues." In Elements of Discourse Understanding, edited by A. Joshi, B. Webber, and I. Sag, 85-105. Cambridge University Press. find
  9. Grosz, Barbara J., and Sidner, Candace L. (1986). "Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse." Computational Linguistics, 12(3), 175-204.
  10. Grosz, Barbara J.; Joshi, Aravind K.; and Weinstein, Scott (1983). "Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse." Ln Proceedings, 21st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA, 44-50.
  11. Hoffman, Beryl, and Turan, Omit Deniz (1993). "Word order and centering in Turkish." In Proceedings, Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania. find
  12. Kameyama, Megumi (1986). "A property-sharing constraint in centering." In Proceedings, 24th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Cambridge, MA, 200-206. find
  13. Kameyama, Megumi (1993). "Intrasentential centering." In Proceedings, Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania. find
  14. Kameyama, Megumi; Passonneau, Rebecca; and Poesio, Massimo (1993). "Temporal centering." In Proceedings, 31st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 70-77. find
  15. Linson, Brian (1993). "A distributional analysis of discourse transitions." In Proceedings, Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania. find
  16. Reichman, Rachel (1978). "Conversational coherency." Cognitive Science, 2, 283-327. find
  17. Sidner, Candace L. (1979). Towards a computational theory off definite anaphora comprehension in english discourse. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. find
  18. Suri, Linda Z. (1992). "Correcting illegal NP omissions using local focus." In Proceedings, 30th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Student Session), 273-275. find
  19. Suri, Linda Z. (1993). Extending focusing frameworks to process complex sentences and to correct the written English of proJi'cient signers of American Sign Language. Doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware. find
  20. Suri, Linda Z., and McCoy, Kathleen F. (1993). "Focusing and Pronoun Resolution in Particular Kinds of Complex Sentences." In Proceedings, Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania. find
  21. Walker, Marilyn A. (1989). "Evaluating discourse processing algorithms." In Proceedings, 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 251-261. find
  22. Walker, Marilyn A. (1993). "Initial contexts and shifting centers." In Proceedings, Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania. find
  23. Walker, M.; Iida, M.; and Cote, S. (1992). "Japanese discourse and the process of centering." Technical Report 92-14, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, The University of Pennsylvania.

Updated

↑ back to top

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/suri-1994-raft-rapr-centering-comparison-discussion/