Andrew Hickl
ABSTRACT
In this paper, we introduce a new framework for recognizing textual entailment which depends on extraction of the set of publicly-held beliefs -- known as discourse commitments -- that can be ascribed to the author of a text or a hypothesis. Once a set of commitments have been extracted from a t-h pair, the task of recognizing textual entailment is reduced to the identification of the commitments from a t which support the inference of the h. Promising results were achieved: our system correctly identified more than 80% of examples from the RTE-3 Test Set correctly, without the need for additional sources of training data or other web-based resources.
- Paul Aarseth, John Lehmann, Murat Deligonul, and Luke Nezda. 2006. TASER: A Temporal and Spatial Expression Recognition and Normalization System. In Proceedings of the Automatic Content Extraction (ACE) Conference.Google Scholar
- Roy Bar-Haim, Ido Dagan, Bill Dolan, Lisa Ferro, Danilo Giampiccolo, Bernardo Magnini, and Idan Szpektor. 2006. The Second PASCAL Recognising Textual Entailment Challenge. In Proceedings of the Second PASCAL Challenges Workshop.Google Scholar
- Johan Bos and Katya Markert. 2006. When logical inference helps in determining textual entailment (and when it doesn't). In Proceedings of the Second PASCAL Recognizing Textual Entailment Conference, Venice, Italy.Google Scholar
- Michael Collins. 1999. Head-Driven Statistical Models for Natural Language Parsing. Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Pennsylvania. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. R. Dice. 1945. Measures of the Amount of Ecologic Association Between Speices. In Journal of Ecology, volume 26, pages 297--302.Google Scholar
- Oren Glickman and Ido Dagan. 2005. A Probabilistic Setting and Lexical Co-occurrence Model for Textual Entailment. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Empirical Modeling of Semantic Equivalence and Entailment, Ann Arbor, USA. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Christine Gunlogson. 2001. True to Form: Rising and Falling Declaratives as Questions in English. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
- Aria Haghighi, Andrew Ng, and Christopher Manning. 2005. Robust textual inference via graph matching. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 387--394. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sanda Harabagiu, Andrew Hickl, and Finley Lacatusu. 2006. Negation, Contrast, and Contradiction in Text Processing. In Proceedings of AAAI, Boston, MA. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andrew Hickl, John Williams, Jeremy Bensley, Kirk Roberts, Bryan Rink, and Ying Shi. 2006. Recognizing Textual Entailment with LCC's Groundhog System. In Proceedings of the Second PASCAL Challenges Workshop.Google Scholar
- Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey Pullum, editors, 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge-University Press.Google Scholar
- V. Jijkoun and M. de Rijke. 2005. Recognizing Textual Entailment Using Lexical Similarity. In Proceedings of the First PASCAL Challenges Workshop. Google ScholarDigital Library
- X. Luo, A. Ittycheriah, H. Jing, N. Kambhatla, and S. Roukos. 2004. A mention-synchronous coreference resolution algorithm based on the Bell Tree. In Proceedings of the ACL-2004, Barcelona, Spain. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Meyers, R. Reeves, C. Macleod, R. Szekely, V. Zielinska, B. Young, and R. Grishman. 2004. The nombank project: An interim report. In A. Meyers, editor, HLT-NAACL 2004 Workshop: Frontiers in Corpus Annotation, pages 24--31, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, May 2 - May 7. Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
- Arcady Mushegian and Eugene Koonin. 2005. A minimal gene set for cellular life derived by compraison of complete bacterial genomes. In Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, volume 93, pages 10268--10273.Google Scholar
- Martha Palmer, Daniel Gildea, and Paul Kingsbury. 2005. The Proposition Bank: An Annotated Corpus of Semantic Roles. Computational Linguistics, 31(1):71--106. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Pedersen, S. Patwardhan, and J. Michelizzi. 2004. WordNet::Similarity - Measuring the Relatedness of Concepts. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-04), San Jose, CA. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Christopher Potts, editor, 2005. The Logic of Conventional Implicatures. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- R. Quinlan. 1998. C5.0: An Informal Tutorial. RuleQuest.Google Scholar
- Robert Stalnaker, 1979. Assertion, volume 9, pages 315--332.Google Scholar
- Ben Taskar, Simone Lacoste-Julien, and Michael Jordan. 2005a. Structured prediction via the extragradient method. In Proceedings of Neural Information Processing Systems, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
- Ben Taskar, Simone Lacoste-Julien, and Dan Klein. 2005b. A discriminative matching approach to word alignment. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT/EMNLP 2005), Vancouver, Canada. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lucy Vanderwende, Arul Menezes, and Rion Snow. 2006. Microsoft Research at RTE-2: Syntactic Contributions in the Entailment Task: an implementation. In Proceedings of the Second PASCAL Challenges Workshop.Google Scholar
Recommendations
The third PASCAL recognizing textual entailment challenge
RTE '07: Proceedings of the ACL-PASCAL Workshop on Textual Entailment and Paraphrasing
This paper presents the Third PASCAL Recognising Textual Entailment Challenge (RTE-3), providing an overview of the dataset creating methodology and the submitted systems. In creating this year's dataset, a number of longer texts were introduced to make ...
Comments