Iso tc37 sc4 tdg3 discourse relations
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 15

ISO/TC37/SC4 TDG3 Discourse Relations PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 91 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

ISO/TC37/SC4 TDG3 Discourse Relations. HASIDA Koiti [email protected] ITRI, AIST, Japan. Issues. Definition Applications Granularity Headedness Taxonomy Wrapped Arguments Relation with Other Tasks. Definition. A discourse relation is

Download Presentation

ISO/TC37/SC4 TDG3 Discourse Relations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Iso tc37 sc4 tdg3 discourse relations

ISO/TC37/SC4 TDG3Discourse Relations

HASIDA Koiti

[email protected]

ITRI, AIST, Japan


Issues

Issues

  • Definition

  • Applications

  • Granularity

  • Headedness

  • Taxonomy

  • Wrapped Arguments

  • Relation with Other Tasks


Definition

Definition

A discourse relation is

  • a relation among events, states of affairs, and/or their types

    • [I worked hard] to [pass the exam].

  • semantic (informational), pragmatic (presentational), or both.

    • [Tom came] because [Mary came].

    • = [I infer [Tom came]] because [Mary came].

event

(arg1)

purpose

relation

event type

(arg2)

conclusion

pragmatic

evidence

result

semantic

cause


Applications

Applications

  • Description of pragmatic/semantic structure of discourse

  • Semantic Authoring

    • improvement of quality

    • reduction of cost


Granularity

Granularity

  • Relations vs. Discourse Connectives

  • Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST)

    • 40~80 relations

  • Penn Discourse TreeBank (PDTB)

    • 250 explicit connectives

  • Ichikawa (1957, 1963, 1978)

    • about 30 relations

  • Infinitely many non-synonymous connectives

    • e.g., fifteen minutes after


Headedness

Headedness

  • Which argument of a discourse relation is the head (nucleus) may depend on the context.

    • Discourse graph (next page)

  • Semantic authoring may use relations underspecified in terms of headedness.


Discourse graph not tree

Discourse Graph (not Tree)

  • A huge amount of content is necessary to implement ubiquitous information service.

  • So content must be easy to create.

  • Also, the retrieval of content must be quick and easy to implement ubiquitous information service.

  • Hence semantic annotation is necessary.

  • So intelligent content technology is necessary.


Taxonomy

Taxonomy

  • RST: relations

    • mononuclear (single head)

      • presentational, subject-matter (informational)

    • multinuclear (multiple heads)

  • PDTB: connectives

    • explicit

      • conjunction

        • subordinate, coordinate

      • adverbial

    • implicit


Taxonomy cont

Taxonomy (cont.)

  • Ichikawa

    • binary logical relations

      • derivation, concessive, others

    • multilateral relations

      • addition, comparison, diversion, others

    • elaborative relations

      • parallelism, complement, chain

  • Merging RST and Ichikawa

    • about 50 relations, modulo headedness


Wrapped arguments

Wrapped Arguments

  • A discourse relation may concern not the whole argument but its core wrapped in an attitude report, a modal operator, etc.

  • How to identify the core (real argument)?

    • explicit annotation

Remember all those vegetables

you slipped under the table ?

arg2

you slipped under the table

cause

Maybe that’s why

Sparky lived so long.

arg1

Sparky lived so long


Explicit annotation

Explicit Annotation

  • Relations and their arguments should be annotated to specify the corresponding text spans.

Remember all those vegetables

you slipped under the table ?

you slipped under the table

equal

arg1

result

Maybe that ’s why

Sparky lived so long.

that

arg2

Sparky lived so long


Relation with other tasks

Relation with Other Tasks

  • Semantic Relations, Semantic Roles, Temporal Relations, and Quantifications

  • Overlap or Projection

    • [Tom came] at [8 o’clock].

    • [Tom came] when [Mary came].

time

(semantic role)

equality or

Projection?

equality or

projection?

circumstance

(discourse rel.)


Proposals

Proposals

  • Granularity

    • multiple granularities in a hierarchical taxonomy

  • Headedness

    • discourse relations modulo headedness

  • Taxonomy

    • Ichikawa’s taxonomy as baseline

  • Wrapped Arguments

    • explicit annotation

  • Relation with Other Tasks

    • common relations to reduce their number


Appendix general guidelines

Appendix: General Guidelines


Name of binary relation

Name of Binary Relation

  • Naming Convention for Relation R

    • noun & adjective … arg2 is R of arg1.

      • subject, agent, patient, purpose, example, etc.

    • verb … arg1 R arg2.

      • includes, contains, etc.

    • preposition … arg1 isR arg2.

      • after, in, until, etc.


  • Login