Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
201001219_Anaphora Resolution an Introduction

201001219_Anaphora Resolution an Introduction

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1 |Likes:
Published by ayush_kulshrestha_1
an introduction to recent anaphora resolution techniques
an introduction to recent anaphora resolution techniques

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: ayush_kulshrestha_1 on Jul 05, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Anaphora resolution an introduction
Ayush Kulshrestha201001219, B.tech 2010,Dhirubhai Ambani institute of Information andCommunication Technology201001219@daiict.ac.in 
Interpreting anaphoric expressions is one of the most fundamental aspects of languageinterpretation. The study of anaphora andanaphora resolution (also known inComputational Linguistics as coreferenceresolution) has brought about manyfundamental developments in theoreticallinguistics (e.g., the development of dynamicmodels of language interpretation) andcomputational linguistics (e.g., thedevelopments of theories of local and globalsalience) and has important practicalApplications, e.g., in work on informationextraction, summarization, and entitydisambiguation.
Let us send engine E2 off with a boxcar toCorning to pick up oranges and while
 there it should pick up the tanker 
Anaphoric expressions
are those whoindicate expressions that depend on linguisticcontext i.e. Their meaning has to be derivedfrom context .But there may be more thanone candidate for a particular anaphora, thusour task is to identify which parts of a textrefer to the same discourse entity and thuswhich is the correct antecedent for theanaphor.Here in the example it refers to the engine E2Also the definite NP engine's interpretationdepends onThe visual context, which in the TRAINS
dialogues is a map of the ’TRAINS world’
 shared between the participants. The tankerhas not
been mentioned before, but it’s
 On this map, and therefore it is shared andhas high salience and can be referred to(Clark and Marshall 1981); this type of contextdependence is usually called (visual) deixishence giving the idea that the engine is that of a train.Here by the linguistic context we havespecified the
domain of interpretation wh
ichaffects interpretation of nominalBy fixing their domain of quantification
theset of objects of the type specified by thenominal complex which are included in thedomain of interpretation (Parted 1995;Cooper 1996). For instance, what makes theuse of definite NP the tanker felicitous is thefact that the domain of quantification of nominal tanker consists of a single object (inthe TRAINS dialogues the domain of interpretation coincides with the visualcontext) .The domain of quantification canalso be specified by the linguistic context.Pronouns are not the only noun phraseswhose interpretation depends on the entitiesin the context.Proper names as
David Mitchell
also refers totwenty different individuals(Wikipedia) the actual entity depends only onthe domain of interpretation, but not oncontext as
they are the natural languageencoding of constants, and therefore theobject they are referring to is directlyencoded in their semantics (as opposed tobeing recovered from the discoursesituation).
. Hence are unique in their domainof interpretation.
Also expressions such as pro
like did in(a) and
such as gapping in (b).a. Kim is making the same mistakes that I did.b. Kim brought the wine, and Robin thecheese need anaphora resolution for did andthe missing verb.
The Interpretation of anaphoricExpressions: Evidence fromCorpora and Psycholinguistics
There is often more than one matchingantecedent for an anaphora, thus resolvingthis ambiguity requires a combination of many different types of information. In thesecases any constraints and preferences areapplied to resolve these conflicts. Hereconstraints put a condition to be satisfiedsatisfying which does not guarantee anything.While preference assigns weight to the mostpromising one
Morphological constraints
-For ex. him can only refer to father, not tomotherBut gender not always used consistently inEnglish
Maja arrived to the airport. [Maja aman] He ...
b. John brought Maja to the airport.[Maja a small dog] It 
Plural pronoun
 They are easy to read following a conjoinednoun phrase (Bill and Sue met) than when theantecedents were syntactically divided (Billmet Sue)
Syntactic constraints
Government and Binding theory
It is an important theory that allows us toimplement syntactic constraints on thecandidates for antecedents.
An element α
node β if and only
α != β
α ,B don't dominate each other,
Every X that dominates α alsodominates β.
In the following tree, B c-commandsCThe c-command relation at the heart of 
Binding theory 
which says
An element α binds an element β if and onlyif α c
commands β, and α and β corefer.
 Consider the sentence
'John' likes his mother
In this sentence 'John' binds "his" so itsatisfies the condition .On the other hand, inthe sentence
The mother of John likeshimself 
John" have no binding relationship
with “himself” so they can’t corefer. Following
3 principal apply the binding theory for theanaphoraresolution
Principle A:
reflexives and reciprocals musthave a c-commanding antecedent in theirgoverning category).
Principle B
states that pronouns cannot havean antecedent in this governing category.
Principle C
states that proper names andnominal
cannot have c-commandingantecedents.
Common Sense knowledge
 Consider the two sentences
The city council refused the women a permit because they feared violence
.Here they refers to the council
The city council refused the women a permit because they advocated violence.
But in this case the refers to the women
Syntactic Preferences
Corpuses suggest that in English corpora, 60-70% of pronouns occur in subject position,and of these, 70% have an antecedent insubject position. It's been called s
These features help us to quickly assign theantecedent correctly with high probability
It says that the more recently introducedentities are more likely antecedents.Hobbs (1978) reported that in his corpus,
90% of all pronoun antecedents werein the current sentence,
98% in the current or the previoussentence,Given (1992) found that
25% of definite antecedents were inthe current clause,
60% in the current or previous 20clauses but
40% were further apartSo it appears that we can just refer to the firstantecedent as the correct one with highprobability.There is a lot of evidence for a
first mentionadvantage
a preference to refer to firstmentioned entities in a sentence combined;these results provide support for a searchstrategy like that proposed by Hobbs (1978
):going back one sentence at a time, then left-to-right.
Hobbs Algorithm
The earliest, best-known syntax-basedalgorithm, often used as a baseline, t
raversesthe surface parse tree breadth-first, left-to-right, and then going backwards onesentence at a time
 It incorporates
binding theory
, and
preference for first mentioned entities.
 It goes up to the dominating NP and finds anantecedent in the left tree & if not found goesup the tree to an S or NP node, finding alongthe left of the path and then along the right of the path if the node is S node and continueabove till it hits an S node where uponcontinue the same with previous sentencesSteps 2, 3 ensure that no NP within the samebinding domain as a pronoun will be chosenas antecedent, in that step 3 requires anotherNP or S node to occur in between the topnode (node X) and any candidate: thus forexample [NP John] will not be chosen as acandidate antecedent of pronoun him in theexample
Hobbs’ Algorithm
1: Begin at the NP node immediatelydominating the pronoun.
2: Go up the tree to the first NP or Snode encountered. Call this node X,and call the path used to reach it p.
3: Traverse all branches below node Xto the left of path p in a left-to-right,breadth first fashion. Propose as theantecedent any NP node that isencountered which has an NP or Snode between it and X.
4: if node X is the highest node in thesentence then
5: traverse the surface parse trees of previous sentences in the text inorder of recency, the most recentfirst; each tree is traversed in a left-to-right, breadth-first manner, andwhen an NP is encountered, it isproposed as antecedent
6: else
7: (X is not the highest node in thesentence) continue to step 9.
8: end if 
9: From node X, go up the tree to thefirst NP or S node encountered. Callthis new node X, and call the pathtraversed to each it p.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->