Elamur Research⌕
☰
home / papers / 2016 / Coreference Annotation Scheme and Relation Types for Hindi

Coreference Annotation Scheme and Relation Types for Hindi

Summary

Coreference-annotated resources for Indian languages are scarce, and schemes built for English handle Hindi's free word order poorly. Earlier Hindi work (Dakwale et al., 2012) covered only some pronominal anaphors and worked at chunk level. It could not encode chains, relation types or multi-chain membership. The authors propose a token-level scheme in SSF with seven attributes. These record mention and chain indices, discontinuous spans, heads of mentions and modifiers, the chain head, and the link type between consecutive mentions of a chain. They also define a taxonomy of link types grouped into anaphoric, strong-identity, near-identity and weak-identity classes, such as Part-of and Function-value pair. This taxonomy is meant to help tasks like question answering and summarization. Consistency was assessed with Jaccard-based Krippendorff's alpha. A semi-automatic Coreference Annotation Tool (CAT) speeds up mention extraction, draft chain creation and head marking. Applying the scheme to roughly 9,000 sentences of the Hindi Dependency Treebank (HDTB) yields a rare Hindi coreference corpus with typed relations.

Key points

  • The scheme has 7 fields: cref, crefHead, acrefmod, crefmod, crefmodHead, crefType and crefChain-Head. A MentionId%(0/1):chainId template marks span ends, discontinuous mentions and chain membership.
  • Relation types fall into 4 broad classes with 21 subtypes in total. Examples include Anaphora-C/RC/E/RE/T, apposition, abbreviation, Part-of, inferred and Function-value relations.
  • Compared with Dakwale et al. (2012) and MUC, the scheme adds:
    • mentions smaller or larger than a chunk,
    • explicit chain indices,
    • typed relations between mentions,
    • multi-chain membership,
    • partial versus full membership in a chain.
  • CAT supports annotators in several ways:
    • It proposes initial chains using string-match, dictionary and dependency rules.
    • It warns about doubtful links using a DBpedia-derived dictionary.
    • It marks heads automatically, relying on Hindi being head-final.
  • The annotated HDTB portion covers 600 news documents, about 9,000 sentences and about 90,000 tokens. Mentions include:
    • 3,000 definite noun sequences
    • 1,677 indefinite noun sequences
    • 1,200 personal pronouns
    • 787 reflexive pronouns
    • 546 locative pronouns
    • 500 verb-nominal sequences
    • 345 relative pronouns

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

Fields: Linguistics & languages

Topics: Coreference resolution

Cited by

5 papers of our library cite it (of the 140673 whose bibliographies we read); 3 of them have a page here, 2 not yet.

Cite

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

@inproceedings{mujadia2016coreference,
  title = {{Coreference Annotation Scheme and Relation Types for Hindi}},
  author = {Mujadia, Vandan and Gupta, Palash and Sharma, Dipti Misra},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'16)},
  year = {2016},
  doi = {10.63317/4gr7ikx4kwie},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.63317/4gr7ikx4kwie}
}

References

17 references, 3 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Artstein, R. and Poesio, M. (2008). Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics. Computational Linguistics, 34(4):555–596. find
  2. Begum, R., Husain, S., Dhwaj, A., Sharma, D. M., Bai, L., and Sangal, R. (2008). Dependency annotation scheme for indian languages. In IJCNLP, pages 721– 726. find
  3. Citeseer. Benmamoun, E., Bhatia, A., and Polinsky, M. (2009). Closest conjunct agreement in head final languages. Linguistic variation yearbook, 9(1):67–88. find
  4. Bharati, A., Sangal, R., and Sharma, D. M. (2007). Ssf: Shakti standard format guide. Language Technologies Research Centre, International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad, India, pages 1– 25. find
  5. Cunningham, H., Maynard, D., Bontcheva, K., and Tablan, V. (2002). A framework and graphical development environment for robust nlp tools and applications. In ACL, pages 168–175. find
  6. Dakwale, P., Sharma, H., and Sharma, D. M. (2012). Anaphora annotation in hindi dependency treebank. In Proceedings of the 26th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information, and Computation, pages 391–400. find
  7. Harabagiu, S. M., Bunescu, R. C., and Maiorano, S. J. (2001). Text and knowledge mining for coreference resolution. In Proceedings of the second meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Language technologies, pages 1–8. Association for Computational L… find
  8. Hovy, E., Marcus, M., Palmer, M., Ramshaw, L., and Weischedel, R. (2006). Ontonotes: the 90% solution. In Proceedings of the human language technology conference of the NAACL, Companion Volume: Short Papers, pages 57–60. Association for Computational Linguistics. find
  9. Krippendorff, K. (2012). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. find
  10. Sage. Mitkov, R., Evans, R., Orasan, C., Barbu, C., Jones, L., and Sotirova, V. (2000). Coreference and anaphora: developing annotating tools, annotated resources and annotation strategies. In Proceedings of the Discourse, Anaphora and Reference Resolution Conference (DAARC2000), pages 49–58. find
  11. Citeseer. Müller, C. and Strube, M. (2001). Annotating anaphoric and bridging relations with mmax. In Proceedings of the Second SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue-Volume 16, pages 1–6. Association for Computational Linguistics. find our card
  12. Nedoluzhko, A., Mírovskỳ, J., and Novák, M. (2013). A coreferentially annotated corpus and anaphora resolution for czech. In Computational Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies. Papers from the Annual International Conference” Dialogue. find
  13. Orasan, C. and Sb, W. W. (2000). Clinka a coreferential links annotator. find
  14. Passonneau, R. (2004). Computing reliability for coreference annotation. find
  15. Recasens, M., Marti, M. A., and Taulé, M. (2007). Where anaphora and coreference meet. annotation in the spanish cess-ece corpus. In Proceedings of RANLP. find
  16. Citeseer. Recasens, M., Hovy, E. H., and Martí, M. A. (2010). A typology of near-identity relations for coreference (nident). In LREC. find our card
  17. Versley, Y., Ponzetto, S. P., Poesio, M., Eidelman, V., Jern, A., Smith, J., Yang, X., and Moschitti, A. (2008). Bart: A modular toolkit for coreference resolution. In Proceedings of the 46th NAACL: Demo Session, pages 9–12. Association for Computational Linguistics. find our card

↑ back to top

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/papers/mujadia-2016-coreference-annotation-scheme-relation-types/