Daniel Marcu, Estibaliz Amorrortu, and Magdalena Romera. 1999. Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. In Proceedings of ACL'99 Workshop on Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging, pages 48--57.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....for the presence of coherence relations, as argued for by (Knott Dale 94; Marcu 97) We examined 37 texts, taken from a corpus of German language information technology test reports. This gave us a total of about 6,850 text tokens, which we annotated manually using a version of RSTTOOL (Marcu et al. 99) that we had previously augmented with methods for the annotation of cue phrases and coreferences. The RST analyses were performed by the first author and one student, based on the considerations from Thompson 88) These relations appear emphasized and Capitalized. Section 3. In case of ....

Daniel Marcu, Estibaliz Amorrortu, and Magdalena Romera. Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. In Proceedings of the ACL'99 Workshop `Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging', pages 48--57. University of Maryland, USA, 1999.

.... figure as discourse units, the question arises which criteria should be set up in order to single out true candidates for discourse units from spurious 3 In order to avoid a lengthy introduction to RST, the definitions are taken from the manual coming with the tool that we used for our analyses [Marcu et al. 1999]. It makes available an extension of the original RST relations [Mann and Thompson, 1988] 4 This analysis reflects the impact of the cue word so in (2 b) More generally, whenever an implicit coherence relation can be made explicit by a paraphrase incorporating a specific cue word, then this ....

....relation can be made explicit by a paraphrase incorporating a specific cue word, then this coherence relation is always assumed to hold [Martin, 1992, p.184] ones. While [Grote et al. 1997] recognize that prepositional phrases are the most compact form to establish a coherence relation, [Marcu et al. 1999] are among the first who propose to consider those phrases as elementary discourse units that are unequivocally the nucleus or the satellite of a rhetorical relation that adds some significant information to the text. However, the restrictions provided by this criterion proved to be too liberal ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Marcu, D., Amorrortu, E., and Romera, M. (1999). Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. In Proc. ACL'99 Workshop `Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging', pages 48--57.

....chosen from two domains. Eight texts were taken from a corpus of German texts from the domain of information technology. We also included three reports that were taken from a German daily newspaper ( Die Tageszeitung ) The texts, which had about 2800 text tokens, were annotated using RSTTOOL (Marcu et al. 1999) which we augmented with methods for annotating cuephrases and coreferences. 4 The depicted structures use standard RST schemas. The target of the relation marks the nucleus. The RST analyses were performed by the author and one student, using the guideline introduced in Section 2. The relation ....

MARCU D., AMORRORTU E. & ROMERA M. (1999). Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. In Proceedings of the ACL'99 Workshop `Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging', p. 48--57, University of Maryland, USA, June 1999. New Brunswick, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics.

....Many questions in discourse processing are still unsolved, such as anaphora resolution. Many thanks to Christie Manning for her help and support. Frank Schilder A few studies that try to aim at a more robust derivation of the rhetorical structure of a text have already been carried out. Marcu (1999), for example, employs decision based learning techniques for rhetorical parsing. A crucial prerequisite for the success of the parser, however, is a discourse corpus tagged with rhetorical and semantic information. Unfortunately, there is still a lack of such corpora and compiling these corpora ....

....not do it as thoroughly as current discourse theories predict. On the contrary, studies on discourse annotation, as well as psycholinguistic research, suggest that readers do not always fully specify the discourse structure and anaphoric relations within a text. A study on discourse annotation by (Marcu et al. 1999), for example, suggests that human annotators of text employ a wait and see approach while tagging text according to discourse structure. Log files created during their empirical studies showed that the annotators simultaneously maintained a high number of unrelated parts of discourse. This ....

MARCU D., ROMERA M. & AMORRORTU E. (1999). Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees: Problems, annotation choices, issues. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Levels of Representation in Discourse, Edinburgh, Scotland, U.K.

....it, the satellite is popped from the stack before the dominant segment (the nucleus) is pushed in the stack based model, and therefore it is not included among the discourse segments that are searched to resolve co references. 3 Similarly, the text in (2) taken from the MUC annotated corpus (Marcu, et al. 1999), was assigned the RST structure in Figure 4, which presents the same problem for the stack based approach: the referent for this in C2 is to the Clinton program in A2, but because it is a subordinate segment, it is no longer on the stack when C2 is processed. 1) A1. George Bush supports big ....

....equivalence relations on the set of all marked references in a text. The texts were also annotated manually with discourse structures built in the style of Mann and Thompson (1988) Each analysis yielded an average of 52 elementary discourse units. Details of the annotation process are given in (Marcu et al. 1999). Six percent of all co references in the corpus are to left satellites. If only co references pointing outside the unit in which they appear (inter unit references) are considered, the rate increases to 7.76 . Among these cases, two possibilities exist: either the reference is unresolvable using ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Marcu D., Amorrortu E. and Romera M. (1999). Experiments in Constructing a Corpus of Discourse Trees. Proceedings of the ACL'99 Workshop on Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging.

No context found.

Daniel Marcu, Estibaliz Amorrortu, and Magdalena Romera. 1999. Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. The ACL'99 Workshop on Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging.

No context found.

Daniel Marcu, Estibaliz Amorrortu, and Magdalena Romera. 1999. Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. In Proc. of the ACL'99 Workshop on Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging, pages 48--57, Maryland.

.... the agreement ffl How should judges (and programs) construct the discourse structure of texts; should they follow a top down, bottom up, or an incremental procedure ffl How does the genre of a text influence the degree to which judges achieve agreement on the task of rhetorical tagging Marcu et al. 1999] describe an experiment designed to answer these questions. In this companion paper, we focus on presenting the difficulties that we faced in designing a discourse annotation manual and on discussing the choices that we made in order to address these difficulties. We also discuss discourse ....

.... 1: A snapshot of our annotation tool 3 Annotation protocol One of us initially prepared a manual that contained instructions pertaining to the functionality of the tool, definitions of edus and rhetorical relations, and a protocol that was supposed to be followed during the annotation process [Marcu, 1999] . Defining and determining the elementary discourse units. Determining in a consistent manner the elementary units of discourse is an extremely difficult enterprise because the boundary between syntactic, semantic, and rhetorical information is blury. One (probably) uncontroversial choice would ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Daniel Marcu, Estibaliz Amorrortu, and Magdalena Romera. Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. In Proceedings of the ACL'99 Workshop on Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging, University of Maryland, June 22 1999.

No context found.

Daniel Marcu, Estibaliz Amorrortu, and Magdalena Romera. 1999. Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. In Proceedings of the ACL'99 Workshop on Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging, pages 48--57, University of Maryland, June 22.

No context found.

Daniel Marcu, Estibaliz Amorrortu, and Magdalena Romera. 1999. Experiments in constructing a corpus of discourse trees. In Proceedings of ACL'99 Workshop on Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging, pages 48--57.

No context found.

Marcu, D., Romera, M. and Amorrortu, E. (1999). Experiments in Constructing a Corpus of Discourse Trees: Problems, Annotation Choices, Issues. The Workshop on Levels of Representation in Discourse, Edinburgh, Scotland, 71-87.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC