Mova0.5 pre-release⌕
☰
home / docs / papers / English / Unrestricted Bridging Resolution

Unrestricted Bridging Resolution

What it is about

The article presents ISNotes (50 Wall Street Journal texts, OntoNotes part) annotated for fine-grained information status — new, old, mediated subtypes (world knowledge, syntactic, comparative, function, aggregate) and bridging — with 663 bridging anaphors, and a two-stage system for bridging with no restriction on the form of the anaphor or the relation. Corpus facts: only 38.5% of bridging anaphors have the, 44.9% have no determiner; 77% of antecedents are within two sentences; only 13.5% of relations are part-of/attribute, 6.6% set membership, 77.6% other (restaurant – the waiter); 61% of bridging anaphors are «siblings» sharing an antecedent (the windows, the carpets, the walls of one building). Stage one recognises bridging anaphors inside information-status classification by cascading collective classification with features such as the coherence gap (a sentence with no coreference, comparative or proper name link to earlier text), argument-taking and relational nouns, building parts, set elements, and genericity cues. Stage two picks antecedents jointly for sibling anaphors, with candidates limited by a discourse scope: inside the second argument of an Expansion relation only locally salient entities count, elsewhere also globally salient ones. Full resolution reaches F 21.6 (precision 20.6, recall 22.6); a pairwise learner reaches 13.6, and the authors' own earlier rule system is close behind the joint model.

Ideas

For Mova

35. Reference and coreference §2 (givenness), §3.2 (bridging), §4 (non-referential and generic uses). Code: coref/src/sieve.rs (bridging pass, comparative and generic blocks), coref/src/mention.rs (generic marks). Measures: exact and strict_a precision and CoNLL F1 on GUM dev; bridging precision on GUM dev. ISNotes rests on OntoNotes (LDC) — tests only.

Topics: Coreference resolution

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.1162/coli_a_00315

@article{hou2018unrestricted,
  title = {{Unrestricted Bridging Resolution}},
  author = {Hou, Yufang and Markert, Katja and Strube, Michael},
  journal = {Computational Linguistics},
  year = {2018},
  doi = {10.1162/coli\_a\_00315},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00315}
}

References

106 references, 9 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Abe, Naoki, Binanca Zadrozny, and John Langford. 2004. An iterative method for multi-class cost-sensitive learning. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 3–11, Seattle, WA. find
  2. Arnold, Jennifer E., Anthony Losongco, Thomas Wasow, and Ryan Ginstrom. 2000. Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language, 76(1):28–55. find
  3. Artstein, Ron and Massimo Poesio. 2008. Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics. Computational Linguistics, 34(4):555–596. find
  4. Asher, Nicholas and Alex Lascarides. 1998. Bridging. Journal of Semantics, 15:83–113. find
  5. Baker, Collin F., Charles J. Fillmore, and John B. Lowe. 1998. The Berkeley FrameNet project. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 86–90, Montréal. find our card
  6. Barzilay, Regina and Mirella Lapata. 2008. Modeling local coherence: An entity-based approach. Computational Linguistics, 34(1):1–34. find
  7. Björkelund, Anders, Kerstin Eckart, Arndt Riester, Nadja Schauffler, and Katrin Schweitzer. 2014. The extended DIRNDL corpus as a resource for coreference and bridging resolution. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 3222–3228, Reykjavik. find
  8. Bos, Johan, Paul Buitelaar, and Anne Marie Mineur. 1995. Bridging as coercive accommodation. In Working Notes of the Edinburgh Conference on Computational Logic and Natural Language Processing (CLNLP-95), pages 1–16, Edinburgh. find
  9. Brants, Thorsten and Alex Franz. 2006. Web 1t 5-gram version 1. LDC2006T13, Philadelphia, PA, Linguistic Data Consortium. find
  10. Burfoot, Clinton, Steven Bird, and Timothy Baldwin. 2011. Collective classification of congressional floor-debate transcipts. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 1506–1515, Portland, OR. find
  11. Cahill, Aoife and Arndt Riester. 2009. Incorporating information status into generation ranking. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, pages 817–825, Singapore. find our card
  12. Cahill, Aoife and Arndt Riester. 2012. Automatically acquiring fine-grained information status distinctions in German. In Proceedings of the SIGdial 2012 Conference: The 13th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 232–236, Seoul. find
  13. Carletta, Jean. 1996. Assessing agreement on classification tasks: The kappa statistic. Computational Linguistics, 22(2):249–254. find
  14. Caselli, Tommaso and Irina Prodanof. 2006. Annotating bridging anaphors in Italian: In search of reliability. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 1173–1176, Genoa. find
  15. Cimiano, Philipp. 2006. Ingredients of a first-order account of bridging. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Inference in Computational Semantics, pages 139–144, Buxton. find
  16. Clark, Herbert H. 1975. Bridging. In Proceedings of the Conference on Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing, pages 169–174, Cambridge, MA. find
  17. Clark, Herbert H. and Susan E. Haviland. 1977. Comprehension and the given-new contract. In Roy Freedle, editor, Discourse Processes: Advances in Research and Theory, volume 1. Ablex, Norwood, NJ, pages 1–40. find
  18. Daneš, František. 1974. Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In F. Daneš, editor, Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective, Prague: Academia, pages 106–128. find
  19. Domingos, Pedro and Daniel Lowd. 2009. Markov Logic: An Interface Layer for Artificial Intelligence. Morgan Claypool Publishers. find
  20. Dunning, Ted. 1993. Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics, 19(1):61–74. find
  21. Eckart, Kerstin, Arndt Riester, and Katrin Schweitzer. 2012. A discourse information radio news database for linguistic analysis. In Christian Chiarcos, Sebastian Nordhoff, and Sebastian Hellmann, editors, Linked Data in Linguistics, Springer, pages 65–76. find
  22. Eckert, Miriam and Michael Strube. 2000. Dialogue acts, synchronising units and anaphora resolution. Journal of Semantics, 17(1):51–89. find
  23. Erkü, Feride and Jeanette K. Gundel. 1987. The pragmatics of indirect anaphors. In Jef Verschueren and Marcella Bertuccelli-Papi, editors, The Pragmatic Perspective: Selected Papers from the 1985 International Pragmatics Conference, Amsterdam, John Benjamins, pages 533–545. find
  24. Fahrni, Angela and Michael Strube. 2012. Jointly disambiguating and clustering concepts and entities with Markov logic. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 815–832, Mumbai. find
  25. Fraurud, Kari. 1990. Definiteness and the processing of noun phrases in natural discourse. Journal of Semantics, 7:395–433. find
  26. Gardent, Claire and Hélène Manuélian. 2005. Création d’un corpus annoté pour le traitement des descriptions définies. Traitement Automatique des Langues, 46(1):115–140. find
  27. Garrod, Simon C. and Anthony J. Sanford. 1982. The mental representation of discourse in a focussed memory system: Implications for the interpretation of anaphoric noun phrases. Journal of Semantics, 1(1):21–41. find
  28. Grosz, Barbara J., Aravind K. Joshi, and Scott Weinstein. 1995. Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2):203–225. find our card
  29. Grosz, Barbara J. and Candace L. Sidner. 1986. Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12(3):175–204. find
  30. Gundel, Jeanette K., Nancy Hedberg, and Ron Zacharski. 2000. Cognitive status and the form of indirect anaphors. Verbum, 22:79–102. find
  31. Hahn, Udo, Michael Strube, and Katja Markert. 1996. Bridging textual ellipses. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, volume 1, pages 496–501, Copenhagen. find
  32. Halliday, M. A. K. and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. Longman, London. find
  33. Harman, Donna and Mark Liberman. 1993. TIPSTER Complete. LDC93T3A, Philadelphia, PA, Linguistic Data Consortium. find
  34. Hawkins, John A. 1978. Definiteness and indefiniteness: A study in reference and grammaticality prediction. Humanities Press, Atlantic Highlands, NJ. find
  35. He, Haibo and Edwardo A. Garcia. 2009. Learning from imbalanced data. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 21(9):1263–1284. find
  36. Hirschman, Lynette and Nancy Chinchor. 1997. MUC-7 coreference task definition, http://www.muc.saic.com/proceedings/. ↗
  37. Hobbs, Jerry R. 1978. Resolving pronominal references. Lingua, 44:311–338. find
  38. Hobbs, Jerry R., Mark E. Stickel, Douglas E. Appelt, and Paul Martin. 1993. Interpretation as abduction. Artificial Intelligence, 63:69–142. find
  39. Hou, Yufang. 2016. Incremental fine-grained information status classification using attention-based LSTMs. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 1880–1890, Osaka. find
  40. Hou, Yufang, Katja Markert, and Michael Strube. 2013a. Cascading collective classification for bridging anaphora recognition using a rich linguistic feature set. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 814–820, Seattle, WA. find
  41. Hou, Yufang, Katja Markert, and Michael Strube. 2013b. Global inference for bridging anaphora resolution. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 907–917, Atlanta, GA. find our card
  42. Hou, Yufang, Katja Markert, and Michael Strube. 2014. A rule-based system for end-to-end bridging resolution. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 2082–2093, Doha. find
  43. Irmer, Matthias. 2009. Bridging Inferences in Discourse Interpretation. Ph.D. thesis, Leipzig University. find
  44. Jensen, David, Jennifer Neville, and Brian Gallagher. 2004. Why collective inference improves relational classification. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 593–598, Seattle, WA. find
  45. Joachims, Thorsten. 1999. Making large-scale support vector machine learning practical. In Bernhard Schölkopf, Christopher J. C. Burges, and Alexander J. Smola, editors, Advances in Kernel Methods – Support Vector Learning, pages 169–184, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. find
  46. Kobayashi, Nozomi, Kentaro Inui, and Yuji Matsumoto. 2007. Extracting aspect-evaluation and aspect-of relations in opinion mining. In Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Language Learning, pages 1065–1074, Prague. find
  47. Lafferty, John, Andrew McCallum, and Fernando Pereira. 2001. Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 282–289, Williamstown, MA. find
  48. Laparra, Egoitz and German Rigau. 2013. ImpAr: A deterministic algorithm for implicit semantic role labelling. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 1180–1189, Sofia. find
  49. Lassalle, Emmanuel and Pascal Denis. 2011. Leveraging different meronym discovery methods for bridging resolution in French. In Proceedings of the 8th Discourse Anaphora and Anaphor Resolution Colloquium (DAARC 2011), pages 35–46, Faro. find
  50. LDC. 1993. Switchboard. Linguistic Data Consortium. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. find
  51. Lee, Heeyoung, Angel Chang, Yves Peirsman, Nathanael Chambers, Mihai Surdeanu, and Dan Jurafsky. 2013. Deterministic coreference resolution based on entity-centric, precision-ranked rules. Computational Linguistics, 39(4):885–916. find our card
  52. Lee, Kenton, Luheng He, Mike Lewis, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2017. End-to-end neural coreference resolution. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 188–197, Copenhagen. find our card
  53. Löbner, Sebastian. 1985. Definites. Journal of Semantics, 4:279–326. find
  54. Löbner, Sebastian. 1998. Definite associative anaphora. Unpublished manuscript, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf. find
  55. Macskassy, Sofus A. and Foster Provost. 2007. Classification in networked data: A toolkit and a univariate case study. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 8:935–983. find
  56. Markert, Katja, Yufang Hou, and Michael Strube. 2012. Collective classification for fine-grained information status. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 795–804, Jeju Island. find
  57. Markert, Katja, Malvina Nissim, and Natalia N. Modjeska. 2003. Using the Web for nominal anaphora resolution. In Proceedings of the EACL Workshop on the Computational Treatment of Anaphora, pages 39–46, Budapest. find
  58. Martschat, Sebastian and Michael Strube. 2014. Recall error analysis for coreference resolution. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 2070–2081, Doha. find our card
  59. Matsui, Tomoko. 2000. Bridging and Relevance. John Benjamins. find
  60. McNemar, Quinn. 1947. Note on the sampling errors of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika, 12(2):153–157. find
  61. Meyers, Adam, Ruth Reeves, Catherine Macleod, Rachel Szekely, Veronika Zielinska, Brian Young, and Ralph Grishman. 2004. Annotating noun argument structure for NomBank. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 803–806, Lisbon. find
  62. Mirkin, Shachar, Ido Dagan, and Sebastian Padó. 2010. Assessing the role of discourse references in entailment inference. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1209–1219, Uppsala. find
  63. Mitchell, Alexis, Stephanie Strassel, Mark Przybocki, JK Davis, George Doddington, Ralph Grishman, Adam Meyers, Ada Brunstain, Lisa Ferro, and Beth Sundheim. 2002. ACE-2 Version 1.0. LDC2003T11, Philadelphia, PA, Linguistic Data Consortium. find
  64. Moschitti, Alessandro. 2006. Making tree kernels practical for natural language learning. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 113–120, Trento. find
  65. Nedoluzhko, Anna, Jiřı́ Mı́rovskỳ, and Petr Pajas. 2009. The coding scheme for annotating extended nominal coreference and bridging anaphora in the Prague dependency treebank. In Proceedings of the Third Linguistic Annotation Workshop at ACL-IJCNLP 2009, pages 108–111, Suntec. find
  66. Neville, Jennifier and David Jensen. 2003. Collective classification with relational dependency networks. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Multi-Relational Data Mining (MRDM-2003) at the International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 77–91, Washington, DC. find
  67. Ng, Vincent and Claire Cardie. 2002. Improving machine learning approaches to coreference resolution. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 104–111, Philadelphia, PA. find
  68. Nissim, Malvina. 2006. Learning information status of discourse entities. In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 94–012, Sydney. find
  69. Nissim, Malvina, Shipara Dingare, Jean Carletta, and Mark Steedman. 2004. An annotation scheme for information status in dialogue. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 1023–1026, Lisbon. find
  70. Omuya, Adinoyi, Vinodkumar Prabhakaran, and Owen Rambow. 2013. Improving the quality of minority class identification in dialog act tagging. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 802–807, Atlanta, GA. find
  71. Parker, Robert, David Graff, Junbo Kong, Ke Chen, and Kazuaki Maeda. 2011. English Gigaword Fifth Edition. LDC2011T07. find
  72. Pedersen, Ted, Siddharth Patwardhan, and Jason Michelizzi. 2004. WordNet::Similarity – Measuring the relatedness of concepts. In Companion Volume to the Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 267–270, Boston, MA. find
  73. Poesio, Massimo. 2003. Associate descriptions and salience: A preliminary investigation. In Proceedings of the EACL Workshop on the Computational Treatment of Anaphora, pages 31–38, Budapest. find
  74. Poesio, Massimo. 2004. The MATE/GNOME proposals for anaphoric annotation, revisited. In Proceedings of the 5th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 154–162, Cambridge, MA. find
  75. Poesio, Massimo, Tomonori Ishikawa, Sabine Schulte im Walde, and Renata Vieira. 2002. Acquiring lexical knowledge for anaphora resolution. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 1220–1225, Las Palmas. find
  76. Poesio, Massimo, Rahul Mehta, Axel Maroudas, and Janet Hitzeman. 2004a. Learning to resolve bridging references. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 143–150, Barcelona. find
  77. Poesio, Massimo, Rosemary Stevenson, Barbara Di Eugenio, and Janet Hitzeman. 2004b. Centering: A parametric theory and its instantiations. Computational Linguistics, 30(3):309–363. find
  78. Poesio, Massimo and Renata Vieira. 1998. A corpus-based investigation of definite description use. Computational Linguistics, 24(2):183–216. find
  79. Poesio, Massimo, Renata Vieira, and Simone Teufel. 1997. Resolving bridging references in unrestricted text. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Operational Factors in Practical, Robust Anaphora Resolution for Unrestricted Text, pages 1–6, Madrid. find
  80. Prasad, Rashmi, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Eleni Miltsakaki, Livio Robaldo, Aravind Joshi, and Bonnie Webber. 2008. The Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 2961–2968, Marrakech. find our card
  81. Prince, Ellen F. 1981. Towards a taxonomy of given-new information. In P. Cole, editor, Radical Pragmatics, Academic Press, New York, pages 223–255. find
  82. Prince, Ellen F. 1992. The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In W. C. Mann and S. A. Thompson, editors, Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, pages 295–325. find
  83. Rahman, Altaf and Vincent Ng. 2011. Learning the information status of noun phrases in spoken dialogues. In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1069–1080, Edinburgh. find
  84. Rahman, Altaf and Vincent Ng. 2012. Learning the fine-grained information status of discourse entities. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 798–807, Avignon. find
  85. Reiter, Nils and Anette Frank. 2010. Identifying generic noun phrases. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 40–49, Uppsala. find
  86. Riedel, Sebastian. 2008. Improving the accuracy and efficiency of MAP inference for Markov logic. In Proceedings of the 24th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 468–475, Helsinki. find
  87. Riester, Arndt, David Lorenz, and Nina Seemann. 2010. A recursive annotation scheme for referential information status. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 717–722, La Valetta. find
  88. Rösiger, Ina and Simone Teufel. 2014. Resolving coreference and associative noun phrases in scientific text. In Proceedings of the Student Research Workshop at the 14th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 45–55, Gothenburg. find
  89. Ruppenhofer, Josef, Caroline Sporleder, Roser Morante, Collin Baker, and Martha Palmer. 2010. SemEval-2010 Task 10: Linking events and their participants in discourse. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluations (SemEval-2), pages 45–50, Uppsala. find
  90. Sasano, Ryohei and Sadao Kurohashi. 2009. A probabilistic model for associative anaphora resolution. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1455–1464, Singapore. find
  91. Schwarz, Monika. 2000. Indirekte Anaphern in Texten. Studien zur domänengebundenen Referenz und Kohärenz im Deutschen. Niemeyer, Tübingen, Germany. find
  92. Somasundaran, Swapna, Galileo Namata, Janyce Wiebe, and Lise Getoor. 2009. Supervised and unsupervised methods in employing discourse relations for improving opinion polarity classification. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 170–179, Singapore. find
  93. Soon, Wee Meng, Hwee Tou Ng, and Daniel Chung Yong Lim. 2001. A machine learning approach to coreference resolution of noun phrases. Computational Linguistics, 27(4):521–544. find our card
  94. Stern, Asher and Ido Dagan. 2014. Recognizing implied predicate-argument relationships in textual inference. In Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 739–744, Baltimore, MD. find
  95. Stone, Philip J., Dexter C. Dunphy, Marshall S. Smith, Daniel M. Ogilvie, and Cambridge Computer Associates. 1966. General Inquirer: A Computer Approach to Content Analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. find
  96. Taskar, Ben, Pieter Abbeel, and Daphne Koller. 2002. Discriminative probabilistic models for relational data. In Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pages 485–492, Edmonton. find
  97. Taskar, Ben, Eran Segal, and Daphne Koller. 2001. Probabilistic classification and clustering in relational data. In Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 870–876, Seattle, WA. find
  98. Vieira, Renata. 1998. Definite Description Processing in Unrestricted Text. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh. find
  99. Vieira, Renata and Massimo Poesio. 2000. An empirically-based system for processing definite descriptions. Computational Linguistics, 26(4):539–593. find
  100. Vieira, Renata and Simone Teufel. 1997. Towards resolution of bridging descriptions. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and of the 8th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 522–524, Madrid. find
  101. Voorhees, Ellen M. 2001. Overview of the TREC 2001 question answering track. In Proceedings of the Tenth Text REtrieval Conference, Gaithersburg, MD. find
  102. Schulte im Walde, Sabine. 1998. Resolving bridging descriptions in high-dimensional space. Master’s thesis, University of Edinburgh, Centre for Cognitive Science. find
  103. Wang, Shuo and Xin Yao. 2012. Multiclass imbalance problems: Analysis and potential solutions. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B, 42(4):1119–1130. find
  104. Weischedel, Ralph, Martha Palmer, Mitchell Marcus, Eduard Hovy, Sameer Pradhan, Lance Ramshaw, Nianwen Xue, Ann Taylor, Jeff Kaufman, Michelle Franchini, Mohammed El-Bachouti, Robert Belvin, and Ann Houston. 2011. OntoNotes release 4.0. LDC2011T03, Philadelphia, PA, Linguistic Data Consortium. find
  105. Witten, Ian H. and Eibe Frank. 2005. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques, 2nd edition, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA. find
  106. Zhou, Zhihua and Xuying Liu. 2010. On multi-class cost-sensitive learning. Computational Intelligence, 26(3):232–257. find

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hou-2018-unrestricted-bridging-resolution/