Joachim Niehren and Alexander Koller. Dominance Constraints in Context Unification. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics, Grenoble, France, 1998. To appear as LNCS. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Processing Underspecified Semantic Representations in the.. - Erk, Koller (2002) Self-citation (Niehren Koller) (Correct)
....solved forms. Our procedures always terminate for dominance and binding constraints, but not necessarily for parallelism constraints. Termination for unrestricted parallelism constraints cannot be expected, as this would solve the prominent open problem of whether context unification is decidable [41, 6, 48]. Furthermore, we review earlier results on the complexity of CLLS and of dominance constraints, its most important sublanguage. The article complements [17] which presented the application of CLLS to natural language semantics. It draws heavily on the algorithms for dominance and parallelism ....
....of CLLS and of dominance constraints, its most important sublanguage. The article complements [17] which presented the application of CLLS to natural language semantics. It draws heavily on the algorithms for dominance and parallelism constraints proposed in [13, 19] and on complexity results in [29, 41, 26]; many technical results that we can only mention here are proved in these papers. However, the algorithmic treatment of binding constraints (and hence, of CLLS as a whole) is new, as is the discussion of how VP ellipses can be resolved by saturating parallelism constraints. There is a large ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Joachim Niehren and Alexander Koller. Dominance Constraints in Context Unification. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics, Grenoble, France, 1998. To appear as LNCS.
Describing Lambda Terms in Context Unification - Niehren, Villaret Self-citation (Niehren) (Correct)
....of lambda terms, and lambda binding constraints to specify variable binding. In particular, CLLS models the interaction of parallelism and variable binding in lambda terms correctly. Parallelism constraints of CLLS alone have the same expressive power as equations of context unification (CU) [16], i.e. equations interpreted over the algebra of trees and contexts [4] CU is closely related to linear second order unification (LSOU) 10] which restricts second order unification to unifiers mapping to linear lambda terms. This relationship can be made precise when allowing for additional ....
....regular constraints of the form tree(X) # L(A) where L(A) is the regular language of some tree automaton A and tree(X) denotes the tree rooted by node X. Finally, one can translate parallelism plus tree regular constraints to context unification with tree regular constraints by extending on [16]. Theorem 12. Every conjunction of parallelism and lambda binding constraints is satisfaction equivalent to some CU equations with tree regular constraints. As explained above, this theorem is a corollary to Theorem 6 of the present paper and Theorem 11 of [17] But to apply the latter, we have ....
Joachim Niehren and Alexander Koller. Dominance constraints in context unification. In 3 rd LACL'98 (Grenoble, France), volume 2014 of LNAI, 2001.
Parallelism Constraints - Erk, Niehren (2000) (1 citation) Self-citation (Niehren) (Correct)
....In contrast to all known procedures for context unification, the presented procedure terminates for the important fragment of dominance constraints and performs reasonably well in a recent application to underspecified natural language semantics. 1 Introduction Parallelism constraints [7, 17] are logical descriptions of trees. They are equal in expressive power to context unification [4] a variant of linear second order unification [14, 19] The decidability of context unification is a prominent open problem [21] even though several fragments are known decidable [23, 22, 4] Fig. ....
....of parallelism constraints Supported by the DFG through the Graduiertenkolleg Kognition in Saarbrucken. Supported by the Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 378 of the DFG, the Esprit Working Group CCL II (EP 22457) and the Procope project of the DAAD. for which powerful solver exist [6, 5, 17]. But when encoded into context unification, dominance constraints are not subsumed by any of the decidable fragments mentioned above, not even by subtree constraints [24] although they look similar. The difference is again that dominance constraints speak about occurences of subtrees whereas ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
J. Niehren and A. Koller. Dominance Constraints in Context Unification. In Proc. Third Conf. on Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics, Grenoble, 1998. To appear in LNCS.
Constraints over Lambda-Structures in Semantic.. - Egg, Niehren, Xu (1998) (12 citations) Self-citation (Niehren) (Correct)
No context found.
Joachim Niehren and Alexander Koller. 1998. Dominance Constraints in Context Unification, January. http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/Papers/ abstracts/Dominance.html. Submitted.
Constraints over Lambda-Structures in Semantic.. - Egg, Niehren, Ruhrberg, Xu (1998) (12 citations) Self-citation (Niehren) (Correct)
No context found.
Joachim Niehren and Alexander Koller. 1998. Dominance Constraints in Context Unification, January. http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/Papers/ abstracts/Dominance.html. Submitted.
Evaluating Context Unification for Semantic Underspecification - Koller (1998) (1 citation) Self-citation (Koller) (Correct)
.... by replacing the first two equations of the constraint by equations between contexts; the modified constraint looks like this: 14.6) C s = X:C 1 (every res lam x (C 2 (X) C s = X:C 3 (some book lam y (C 4 (X) X s = C s (read var y var x ) X s = C(every res) X t = C(every student) In [Niehren Koller, 1998], it is shown that this can be extended to a systematic way of encoding dominance in context unification. In the same paper, it is shown that every equation between contexts can be expressed as a conjunction of two equations between tree valued expressions; so allowing them does not affect the ....
....relations between tree nodes instead of via variable names. CLLS also talks directly about dominance relations between tree nodes, avoiding the somewhat awkward encoding of Example (14.6) and allows specific parallelism constraints that exactly restore the expressiveness of context unification [Niehren Koller, 1998]. Moreover, mechanisms for modelling anaphoric links (that can t be described with context unification) are provided, and strict sloppy ambiguities are captured correctly. It is likely that a complete algorithm for CLLS can still be implemented much more efficiently than even our modified ....
Joachim Niehren and Alexander Koller. Dominance constraints in context unification. Submitted. http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/ Papers/abstracts/Dominance.html.
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