Sentences with Gapping: Parsing and Reconstructing Elided Predicates

What it is about

In "Paul likes coffee and Mary tea" the verb is elided, so standard parsers attach the remnants badly and downstream relation extraction misses the predicate. The paper parses to UD trees and then reconstructs the elided material in two ways. The COMPOSITE method has the parser predict composite relations (for example conj>obj) that encode the gap, and turns them into an enhanced graph with a copy node. The ORPHAN method lets the parser predict only the orphan label, then reconstructs the missing predicate by aligning remnants with their correspondents using word embeddings. On gold trees both reconstruct the clause with high accuracy. End to end, recall is low because the parser often misses the gap, and both methods score about the same, with the ORPHAN method more precise and COMPOSITE more recall-oriented. A Swedish case study shows the method transfers.

Ideas

• I1. en/src/parse.rs and en/src/ctx.rs: add an orphan detector as a first stage (features from the local context and the coordination pattern), and measure orphan recall on EWT test and on the gapping set, since recall is the bottleneck in this paper.
• I2. prag/world: reconstruction by alignment of remnants to correspondents using en lemmas and UPOS instead of word embeddings (Mova has no pretrained vectors); measure reattachment accuracy with gold trees first, which is the ceiling, then with en trees.
• I3. gparse: keep the orphan label as the output and predict the composite form in a separate head (the paper saw the composite label space hurt labelled attachment); metric: LAS on EWT dev, two seeds.

For Mova

This is 29. Ellipsis, word order and information structure. The code is en/src/parse.rs (the gap detector), prag/world (the reconstructed frames) and gparse for the label-space question. Measure the gold-tree ceiling before the parsed version, so that errors are not blamed on the reconstruction.

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.18653/v1/n18-1105 · arXiv 1804.06922

@inproceedings{schuster2018sentences,
  title = {{Sentences with Gapping: Parsing and Reconstructing Elided Predicates}},
  author = {Schuster, Sebastian and Nivre, Joakim and Manning, Christopher D.},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers)},
  year = {2018},
  doi = {10.18653/v1/n18-1105},
  eprint = {1804.06922},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/n18-1105}
}

References

58 references, 14 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Pranav Anand and Daniel Hardt. 2016. Antecedent selection for sluicing: Structure and content. In Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP 2016). pages 1234–1243. https://doi.org/ 10.18653/v1/D16-1131. ↗ our card
2. Eduard Bejček, Eva Hajičová, Jan Hajič, Pavlína Jínová, Václava Kettnerová, Veronika Kolářová, Marie Mikulová, Jiří Mírovský, Anna Nedoluzhko, Jarmila Panevová, Lucie Poláková, Magda Ševčíková, Jan Štěpánek, and Šárka Zikánová. 2013. Prague Dependency Treebank 3.0. LIN-DAT/CLARIN digital library at the Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics, Charles University. http://hdl.handle.net/11858/ 00-097C-0000-0023-1AAF-3. ↗
3. Ann Bies, Mark Ferguson, Karen Katz, Robert Mac-Intyre, Victoria Tredinnick, Grace Kim, Mary Ann Marcinkiewicz, and Britta Schasberger. 1995. Bracketing guidelines for Treebank II style Penn Treebank project. Technical report, University of Pennsylvania. find
4. Shu Cai, David Chiang, and Yoav Goldberg. 2011. Language-independent parsing with empty elements. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (ACL 2011). pages 212–216. http://www.aclweb.org/ anthology/P11-2037. ↗
5. Richard Campbell. 2004. Using linguistic principles to recover empty categories. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2004). https://doi.org/10.3115/1218955.1219037. ↗
6. Michael Collins. 1997. Three generative, lexicalised models for statistical parsing. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 1997). pages 16– 23. https://doi.org/10.3115/976909. 979620. ↗
7. Elizabeth Coppock. 2001. Gapping: In defense of deletion. In Mary Andronis, Christopher Ball, Heidi Elston, and Sylvain Neuvel, editors, Papers from the 37th Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, pages 133– 148. find
8. Péter Dienes and Amit Dubey. 2003a. Antecedent recovery: Experiments with a trace tagger. In Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP 2003). pages 33–40. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W03-1005. ↗
9. Péter Dienes and Amit Dubey. 2003b. Deep syntactic processing by combining shallow methods. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2003). pages 431–438. https://doi.org/10. 3115/1075096.1075151. ↗
10. Timothy Dozat and Christopher D. Manning. 2017. Deep biaffine attention for neural dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR 2017). pages 1–8. https://openreview.net/pdf? id=Hk95PK9le. ↗ our card
11. Timothy Dozat, Peng Qi, and Christopher D. Manning. 2017. Stanford’s graph-based neural dependency parser at the CoNLL 2017 Shared Task. In Proceedings of the CoNLL 2017 Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies. pages 20–30. https://doi.org/10.18653/ v1/K17-3002. ↗ our card
12. Kira Droganova and Daniel Zeman. 2017. Elliptic constructions: Spotting patterns in UD treebanks. In Proceedings of the NoDaLiDa 2017 Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW 2017). pages 48– 57. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/ W17-0406. ↗
13. Kais Dukes and Nizar Habash. 2011. One-step statistical parsing of hybrid dependency-constituency syntactic representations. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Parsing Technologies. pages 92–103. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W11-2912. ↗
14. Jan Einarsson. 1976. Talbankens skriftspråkskonkor-dans. Institutionen för nordiska språk, Lunds universitet. find
15. Annahita Farudi. 2013. Gapping in Farsi: A Crosslinguistic Investigation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts Amherst. http://scholarworks.umass.edu/ dissertations/AAI3556244. ↗
16. Jessica Ficler and Yoav Goldberg. 2016. Improved parsing for argument-clusters coordination. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2016). pages 72–76. https://doi.org/10.18653/ v1/P16-2012. ↗
17. Ryan Gabbard, Mitchell Marcus, and Seth Kulick. 2006. Fully parsing the Penn Treebank. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL (NAACL 2006). pages 184–191. https://doi.org/10.3115/1220835.1220859. ↗ our card
18. Daniel Hardt. 1997. An empirical approach to VP ellipsis. Computational Linguistics 23(4):525–541. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/ J97-4002. ↗ our card
19. Petter Haugereid. 2017. An incremental approach to gapping and conjunction reduction. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. pages 179–198. http://cslipublications.stanford.edu/ HPSG/2017/hpsg2017-haugereid.pdf. ↗
20. Katsuhiko Hayashi and Masaaki Nagata. 2016. Empty element recovery by spinal parser operations. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2016). pages 95–100. https://doi.org/10. 18653/v1/P16-2016. ↗
21. Julia Hockenmaier and Mark Steedman. 2007. CCGbank: a corpus of CCG derivations and dependency structures extracted from the Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics 33(3):355–396. http:// www.aclweb.org/anthology/J07-3004. ↗ our card
22. Ray S. Jackendoff. 1971. Gapping and related rules. Linguistic Inquiry 2(1):21–35. find
23. Kyle Johnson. 2014. Gapping. Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. http://people.umass.edu/ kbj/homepage/Content/gapping.pdf. ↗
24. Mark Johnson. 2002. A simple pattern-matching algorithm for recovering empty nodes and their antecedents. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2002). pages 136–143. https://doi.org/10.3115/1073083.1073107. ↗
25. Yoshihide Kato and Shigeki Matsubara. 2016. Transition-based left-corner parsing for identifying PTB-style nonlocal dependencies. In Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2016). pages 930–940. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/P16-1088. ↗
26. Martin Kay. 1980. Algorithm schemata and data structures in syntactic processing. Technical report, Xerox PARC. find
27. Dan Klein and Christopher Manning. 2001. Parsing with treebank grammars: empirical bounds, theoretical models, and the structure of the Penn Treebank. In Proceedings of 39th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2001). pages 338–345. https://doi.org/10. 3115/1073012.1073056. ↗
28. Yusuke Kubota and Robert Levine. 2016. Gapping as hypothetical reasoning. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 34(1):107–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-015-9298-4. ↗
29. Jonathan K. Kummerfeld and Dan Klein. 2017. Parsing with traces: An O(n 4 ) algorithm and a structural representation. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 5:441– 454. https://www.transacl.org/ojs/ index.php/tacl/article/view/1170. ↗
30. Shalom Lappin. 2005. A sequenced model of anaphora and ellipsis resolution. In António Branco, Tony McEnery, and Ruslan Mitkov, editors, Anaphora Processing: Linguistic, Cognitive and Computational Modelling, John Benjamins Publishing, Amsterdam, pages 3–16. https://doi.org/10. 1075/cilt.263.03lap. ↗
31. Roger Levy and Christopher D. Manning. 2004. Deep dependencies from context-free statistical parsers. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2004). pages 327–334. https://doi.org/10. 3115/1218955.1218997. ↗
32. Mitchell P. Marcus, Beatrice Santorini, and Mary Ann Marcinkiewicz. 1993. Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics 19(2):313–330. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/J93-2004. ↗ our card
33. Ryan McDonald, Fernando Pereira, Kiril Ribarov, and Jan Hajič. 2005. Non-projective dependency parsing using spanning tree algorithms. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT-EMNLP 2005). pages 523–530. https://doi.org/10. 3115/1220575.1220641. ↗ our card
34. Marjorie McShane and Petr Babkin. 2016. Detection and resolution of verb phrase ellipsis. Linguistic Issues in Language Technology (LiLT) 13(1):1–34. find our card
35. Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg S Corrado, and Jeff Dean. 2013. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 26 (NIPS 2013). pages 3111–3119. find
36. Saul B. Needleman and Christian D. Wunsch. 1970. A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology 48(3):443–453. https://doi.org/10. 1016/0022-2836(70)90057-4. ↗
37. Leif Arda Nielsen. 2004. Verb phrase ellipsis detection using automatically parsed text. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 2004). 1, pages 1093–1099. https://doi.org/10.3115/ 1220355.1220512. Joakim Nivre, Željko Agić, Lars Ahrenberg, Lene Antonsen, Maria Jesus Aranzabe, Masayuki Asahara, Luma Ateyah, Mohammed Attia, Aitziber Atutxa, Liesbeth Augustinus, Elena Badmaeva, Miguel Ballesteros, Esha Banerjee, Sebastian Bank, Verginica Barbu Mititelu, John Bauer, Kepa Bengoetxea, Riyaz Ahmad Bhat, Eckhard Bick, Victoria Bobicev, Carl Börstell, Cristina Bosco, Gosse Bouma, Sam Bowman, Aljoscha Burchardt, Marie Candito, Gauthier Caron, Gülşen Cebiroğlu Ery-iğit, Giuseppe G. A. Celano, Savas Cetin, Fabricio Chalub, Jinho Choi, Silvie Cinková, Çağrı Çöltekin, Miriam Connor, Elizabeth Davidson, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Valeria de Paiva, Arantza Diaz de Ilarraza, Peter Dirix, Kaja Dobrovoljc, Timothy Dozat, Kira Droganova, Puneet Dwivedi, Marhaba Eli, Ali Elkahky, Tomaž Erjavec, Richárd Farkas, Hector Fernandez Alcalde, Jennifer Foster, Cláudia Freitas, Katarína Gajdošová, Daniel Galbraith, Marcos Garcia, Moa Gärdenfors, Kim Gerdes, Filip Ginter, Iakes Goenaga, Koldo Gojenola, Memduh Gökırmak, Yoav Goldberg, Xavier Gómez Guinovart, Berta Gonzáles Saavedra, Matias Grioni, Normunds Grūzı̄tis, Bruno Guillaume, Nizar Habash, Jan Hajič, Jan Hajič jr., Linh Hà Mỹ, Kim Harris, Dag Haug, Barbora Hladká, Jaroslava Hlaváčová, Florinel Hociung, Petter Hohle, Radu Ion, Elena Irimia, Tomáš Jelínek, Anders Johannsen, Fredrik Jørgensen, Hüner Kaşıkara, Hiroshi Kanayama, Jenna Kanerva, Tolga Kayadelen, Václava Kettnerová, Jesse Kirchner, Natalia Kotsyba, Simon Krek, Veronika Laippala, Lorenzo Lambertino, Tatiana Lando, John Lee, Phương Lê Hồng, Alessandro Lenci, Saran Lertpradit, Herman Leung, Cheuk Ying Li, Josie Li, Keying Li, Nikola Ljubešić, Olga Loginova, Olga Lyashevskaya, Teresa Lynn, Vivien Macketanz, Aibek Makazhanov, Michael Mandl, Christopher D. Manning, Cătălina Mărănduc, David Mareček, Katrin Marheinecke, Héctor Martínez Alonso, André Martins, Jan Mašek, Yuji Matsumoto, Ryan McDonald, Gustavo Mendonça, Niko Miekka, Anna Missilä, Cătălin Mititelu, Yusuke Miyao, Simonetta Montemagni, Amir More, Laura Moreno Romero, Shinsuke Mori, Bohdan Moskalevskyi, Kadri Muischnek, Kaili Müürisep, Pinkey Nainwani, Anna Nedoluzhko, Gunta Nešpore-Bērzkalne, Lương Nguyễn Thi., Huyền Nguyễn Thi. Minh, Vitaly Nikolaev, Hanna Nurmi, Stina Ojala, Petya Osenova, Robert Östling, Lilja Øvrelid, Elena Pascual, Marco Passarotti, Cenel-Augusto Perez, Guy Perrier, Slav Petrov, Jussi Piitulainen, Emily Pitler, Barbara Plank, Martin Popel, Lauma Pretkalnin , a, Prokopis Prokopidis, Tiina Puolakainen, Sampo Pyysalo, Alexandre Rademaker, Loganathan Ramasamy, Taraka Rama, Vinit Ravishankar, Livy Real, Siva Reddy, Georg Rehm, Larissa Rinaldi, Laura Rituma, Mykhailo Romanenko, Rudolf Rosa, Davide Rovati, Benoît Sagot, Shadi Saleh, Tanja Samardžić, Manuela Sanguinetti, Baiba Saulı̄te, Sebastian Schuster, Djamé Seddah, Wolfgang Seeker, Mojgan Seraji, Mo Shen, Atsuko Shimada, Dmitry Sichinava, Natalia Silveira, Maria Simi, Radu Simionescu, Katalin Simkó, Mária Šimková, Kiril Simov, Aaron Smith, Antonio Stella, Milan Straka, Jana Strnadová, Alane Suhr, Umut Sulubacak, Zsolt Szántó, Dima Taji, Takaaki Tanaka, Trond Trosterud, Anna Trukhina, Reut Tsarfaty, Francis Tyers, Sumire Uematsu, Zdeňka Urešová, Larraitz Uria, Hans Uszkoreit, Sowmya Vajjala, Daniel van Niekerk, Gertjan van Noord, Viktor Varga, Eric Villemonte de la Clergerie, Veronika Vincze, Lars Wallin, Jonathan North Washington, Mats Wirén, Tak-sum Wong, Zhuoran Yu, Zdeněk Žabokrtský, Amir Zeldes, Daniel Zeman, and Hanzhi Zhu. 2017. Universal Dependencies 2.1. LINDAT/CLARIN digital library at the Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics (ÚFAL), Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University. http://hdl. handle.net/11234/1-2515. ↗ our card
38. Joakim Nivre, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Filip Ginter, Yoav Goldberg, Jan Hajič, Christopher D. Manning, Ryan McDonald, Slav Petrov, Sampo Pyysalo, Natalia Silveira, Reut Tsarfaty, and Daniel Zeman. 2016. Universal Dependencies v1: A multilingual treebank collection. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016). pages 1659–1666. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/ lrec2016/pdf/348_Paper.pdf. ↗ our card
39. Eric W. Noreen. 1989. Computer-Intensive Methods for Testing Hypotheses. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. find
40. Stephan Oepen, Marco Kuhlmann, Yusuke Miyao, Daniel Zeman, Silvie Cinkova, Dan Flickinger, Jan Hajic, and Zdenka Uresova. 2015. SemEval 2015 Task 18: Broad-coverage semantic dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval 2015). pages 915–926. https://doi.org/10. 18653/v1/S15-2153. ↗
41. Tomoko Ohta, Yuka Tateisi, and Jin-Dong Kim. 2002. The GENIA corpus: An annotated research abstract corpus in molecular biology domain. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Human Language Technology Research (HLT 2002) pages 82–86. https://doi.org/10.3115/ 1289189.1289260. ↗
42. Timothy Osborne. 2006. Gapping vs. non-gapping coordination. Linguistische Berichte 207:307–337. find
43. Sebastian Padó. 2006. User’s guide to sigf: Significance testing by approximate randomisation. https://nlpado.de/~sebastian/ software/sigf.shtml. ↗
44. Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher Manning. 2014. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP 2014). pages 1532–1543. https://doi.org/10.3115/ v1/D14-1162. ↗
45. John Robert Ross. 1970. Gapping and the order of constituents. In Manfred Bierwisch and Karl Erich Hei-dolph, editors, Progress in Linguistics, De Gruyter, The Hague, pages 249–259. find
46. Helmut Schmid. 2006. Trace prediction and recovery with unlexicalized PCFGs and slash features. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the ACL (ACL 2006). pages 177–184. https://doi.org/10.3115/1220175.1220198. ↗
47. Sebastian Schuster, Matthew Lamm, and Christopher D. Manning. 2017. Gapping constructions in Universal Dependencies v2. In Proceedings of the NoDaLiDa 2017 Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW 2017). pages 123–132. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W17-0416. ↗ our card
48. Sebastian Schuster and Christopher D. Manning. 2016. Enhanced English Universal Dependencies: An improved representation for natural language understanding tasks. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016). pages 2371–2378. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/ lrec2016/pdf/779_Paper.pdf. ↗ our card
49. Wolfgang Seeker, Richárd Farkas, Bernd Bohnet, Helmut Schmid, and Jonas Kuhn. 2012. Data-driven dependency parsing with empty heads. In Proceedings of COLING 2012. pages 1081–1090. http:// www.aclweb.org/anthology/C12-2105. ↗
50. Natalia Silveira, Timothy Dozat, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Samuel Bowman, Miriam Connor, John Bauer, and Christopher D Manning. 2014. A gold standard dependency corpus for English. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2014). pages 2897–2904. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/ lrec2014/pdf/1089_Paper.pdf. ↗
51. Katalin Ilona Simkó and Veronika Vincze. 2017. Hungarian copula constructions in dependency syntax and parsing. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Dependency Linguistics (Depling 2017). pages 240–247. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W17-6527. ↗
52. Mark Steedman. 1990. Gapping as constituent coordination. Linguistics and Philosophy 13(2):207–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00630734. ↗
53. Maziar Toosarvandani. 2016. Embedding the antecedent in gapping: Low coordination and the role of parallelism. Linguistic Inquiry 47(2):381– 390. https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_ 00216. ↗
54. William A. Woods. 1970. Transition network grammars for natural language analysis. Communications of the ACM 13(10):591–606. find
55. William A. Woods. 1973. An experimental parsing system for transition network grammars. In Randall Rustin, editor, Natural Language Processing, Algo-rithmics Press, New York, pages 111–154. find
56. G. Vanden Wyngaerd. 2007. Gapping constituents. Unpublished manuscript, FWO/K.U. Brussel. https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/408979/1/ 09HRPL&L02.pdf. ↗
57. Alexander Yeh. 2000. More accurate tests for the statistical significance of result differences. In Proceedings of the The 18th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 2000). pages 947–953. http://www.aclweb.org/ anthology/C00-2137. ↗
58. Daniel Zeman, Martin Popel, Milan Straka, Jan Hajič, Joakim Nivre, Filip Ginter, Juhani Luotolahti, Sampo Pyysalo, Slav Petrov, Martin Potthast, Francis Tyers, Elena Badmaeva, Memduh Gökrmak, Anna Nedoluzhko, Silvie Cinková, Jan Hajič jr., Jaroslava Hlaváčová, Václava Kettnerová, Zdenka Urešová, Jenna Kanerva, Stina Ojala, Anna Missilä, Christopher D. Manning, Sebastian Schuster, Siva Reddy, Dima Taji, Nizar Habash, Herman Leung, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Manuela Sanguinetti, Maria Simi, Hiroshi Kanayama, Valeria de Paiva, Kira Droganova, Hěctor Martínez Alonso, Hans Uszkoreit, Vivien Macketanz, Aljoscha Burchardt, Kim Harris, Katrin Marheinecke, Georg Rehm, Tolga Kayadelen, Mohammed Attia, Ali Elkahky, Zhuoran Yu, Emily Pitler, Saran Lertpradit, Michael Mandl, Jesse Kirchner, Hector Fernandez Alcalde, Jana Strnadova, Esha Banerjee, Ruli Manurung, Antonio Stella, Atsuko Shimada, Sookyoung Kwak, Gustavo Mendonça, Tatiana Lando, Rattima Nitisaroj, and Josie Li. 2017. CoNLL 2017 Shared Task: Multilingual parsing from raw text to Universal Dependencies. In Proceedings of the CoNLL 2017 Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies. pages 1–19. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/K17-3001. ↗ our card

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/ud-2018-schuster-sentences-gapping-parsing-reconstructing-elided/