File size: 116,705 Bytes
6fa4bc9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095 2096 2097 2098 2099 2100 2101 2102 2103 2104 2105 2106 2107 2108 2109 2110 2111 2112 2113 2114 2115 2116 2117 2118 2119 2120 2121 2122 2123 2124 2125 2126 2127 2128 2129 2130 2131 2132 2133 2134 2135 2136 2137 2138 2139 2140 2141 2142 2143 2144 2145 2146 2147 2148 2149 2150 2151 2152 2153 2154 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163 2164 2165 2166 2167 2168 2169 2170 2171 2172 2173 2174 2175 2176 2177 2178 2179 2180 2181 2182 2183 2184 | {
"paper_id": "P89-1024",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T08:14:45.069031Z"
},
"title": "A HYBRID APPROACH TO REPRESENTATION IN THE JANUS NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSOR",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ralph",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Weischedel",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "BBN Systems and Technologies Corporation",
"location": {
"addrLine": "10 Moulton St. CambHdge",
"postCode": "02138",
"region": "MA"
}
},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "In BBN's natural language understanding and generation system (Janus), we have used a hybrid approach to representation, employing an intensional logic for the representation of the semantics of utterances and a taxonomic language with formal semantics for specification of descriptive constants and axioms relating them. Remarkably, 99.9% of 7,000 vocabulary items in our natural language applications could be adequately axiomatlzed in the taxonomic language.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P89-1024",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "In BBN's natural language understanding and generation system (Janus), we have used a hybrid approach to representation, employing an intensional logic for the representation of the semantics of utterances and a taxonomic language with formal semantics for specification of descriptive constants and axioms relating them. Remarkably, 99.9% of 7,000 vocabulary items in our natural language applications could be adequately axiomatlzed in the taxonomic language.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "Hybrid representation systems have been explored before [9, 24, 31] , but until now only one has been used in an extensive natural language processing system. KL-TWO [31] , based on a propositional logic, was at the core of the mapping from formulae to lexical items in the Penman generation system [28] . In this paper we report some of the design decisions made in creating a hybrid of an intensional logic with a taxonomic language for use in Janus, BBN's natural language system, consisting of the IRUS-II understanding components [5] and the Spokesman generation components. To our knowledge, this is the first hybrid approach using an intensional logic, and the first time a hybrid representation system has been used for understanding.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 56,
"end": 59,
"text": "[9,",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 60,
"end": 63,
"text": "24,",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 64,
"end": 67,
"text": "31]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF28"
},
{
"start": 166,
"end": 170,
"text": "[31]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF28"
},
{
"start": 299,
"end": 303,
"text": "[28]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF25"
},
{
"start": 535,
"end": 538,
"text": "[5]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "In Janus, the meaning of an utterance is represented as an expression in WML (World Model Language) [15] , which is an intensional logic. However, a logic merely prescribes the framework of semantics and of ontology.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 100,
"end": 104,
"text": "[15]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "The descriptive constants, that is the individual constants (functions with no arguments), the other function symbols, and the predicate symbols, are abstractions without any detailed commitment to ontology. (We will abbreviate descriptive constants throughout the remainder of this paper as constants.)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "Axioms stating the relationships between the constants are defined in NIKL [8, 22] . We wished to explore whether a language with limited expressive power but fast reasoning procedures is adequate for core problems in natural language processing. The NIKL axioms constrain the set of possible models for the logic in a given domain.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 75,
"end": 78,
"text": "[8,",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 79,
"end": 82,
"text": "22]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "Though we have found clear examples that argue for more expressive power than NIKL provides, 99.9% of the examples in our expert system and data bass applications have fit well within the constraints of NIKL. Based on our experience and that of others, the axioms and limited inference algorithms can be used for classes of anaphora resolution, interpretation of highly polysemous or vague words such as have and with, finding omitted relations in novel nomina/ compounds, and selecting modifier attachment based on selection restrictions. Sections 2 and 3 describe the rationale for our choices in creating this hybrid. Section 4 illustrates how the hybrid is used in Janus. Section 5 briefly summarizes some experience with domainindependent abstractions for organizing constants of the domain. Section 6 identifies related hybrids, and Section 7 summarizes our conclusions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "We chose well-documented representation /anguages in order to focus on formally specifying domains and using ~hat specification in language processing rather than on defining new domainindependent representation languages.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "_Commitments to Component Hepresentation Formalisms",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "A critical decision was our selection of intensional logic as the semantic representation language. (Our motivations for that choice are covered in Section 2.1.) Given an intensional logic, the fundamental question was how to support inference for semantic and discourse processing. The novel aspect of the design was selecting a taxonomic language and associated inference techniques for that purpose.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "_Commitments to Component Hepresentation Formalisms",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "First and foremost, though we had found firstorder representations adequate (and desirable) for NL interfaces to relational data bases, we felt a richer semantic representation was important for future applications. The following classes of representation challenges motivated our choice.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Explicit representations of time and world.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "Object-oriented simulation systems were an application that involved these, as were expert systems supporting hypothetical worlds. The underlying application systems involved a tree of possible worlds. Typical questions about these included What if the stop time were 20 hours? to set up a possible world and run a simulation, and In which situations is blue attri. tion greater than 50%? where the whole tree of worlds is to be examined. The potential of timevarying entities existed in some of the applications as well, whether attribute values (as in How often has U$$ Enterprise been C3?) or entities (When was CV22 decommissioned~ The time and world indices of WML provided the opportunity to address such semantic phenomena (though a modal temporal logic or other logics might serve this prupose).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Distributive/collective quantification. Collective readings could arise, though they appear rare, e.g., Do USS Frederick's capabilities include anti.submarine warfare or When did the ships collide? See [25] for a computational treatment of distributive/collective readings in WML.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 204,
"end": 208,
"text": "[25]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Generics and Mass Terms. Mass terms and generally true statements arise in these applications, such as in Do nuclear carriers carry JP5?, where JP5 is a kind of jet fuel. Term-forming operators and operators on predicates are one approach and can be accommodated in intensional logics.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Propositional Attitudes. Statements of user preference, e.g., I want to leave in the afternoon, should be accommodated in interfaces to expert systems, as should statements of belief, I believe I must fly with a U.S. carrier.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "Since intensionel logics allow operators on predicates and on propositions, such statements may be conveniently represented.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "Our second motivation for choosing intensional logic was our desire to capitalize on other advantages we perceived for applying it to natural language processing (NLP), such as the potential simplicity and compositionality of mapping from syntactic form to semantic representation and the many studies in linguistic semantics that assume some form of intensional logic.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "However, the disadvantages of intensional logic for NLP include:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 The complexity of logical expressions is great even for relatively straightforward utterances using Montague grammar [21] . However, by adopting intensional logic while rejecting Montague grammar, we have made some inroads toward matching the complexity of the proposition to the complexity of the utterance; that simplicity is at the expense of using a more powerful semantic interpreter and of sacrificing compositionality in those cases where language itself appears non-compositional.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 119,
"end": 123,
"text": "[21]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Real-time inference strategies are a challenge for so rich a logic. However, our hypothesis is that large classes of the linguistic examples requiring common sense reasoning can be handled using limited inference algorithms on a taxonomic language. Arguments supporting this hypothesis appear in [2, 13] for interpreting nominal compounds; in [6, 7, 29] , for common sense reasoning about modifier attachment; and in [32] for phenomena in definite reference resolution.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 298,
"end": 301,
"text": "[2,",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 302,
"end": 305,
"text": "13]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
},
{
"start": 345,
"end": 348,
"text": "[6,",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 349,
"end": 351,
"text": "7,",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
},
{
"start": 352,
"end": 355,
"text": "29]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF26"
},
{
"start": 419,
"end": 423,
"text": "[32]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF29"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "This second disadvantage, the goal of tractable, real.time inference strategies, is the basis for adding taxonomic reasoning to WML, giving a hybrid representation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why an Intensional Logic",
"sec_num": "2.1."
},
{
"text": "Our hypothesis is that much of the reasoning needed in semantic processing can be supported by a taxonomy. The ability to pre-compile pre-specified inferential chains, to index them via concept name and role name, and to employ taxonomic inheritance for organizing knowledge were critical in selecting taxonomic representation to supplement WML.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why a Taxonomic Language",
"sec_num": "2.2."
},
{
"text": "The well-defined semantics of NIKL was the basis for choosing it over other taxonomic systems. A furthat benefit in choosing NIKL is the availability of KREME [1] , which can be used as a sophisticated browsing, editing, and maintenance environment for taxonomies such as those written in NIKL; KREME has proven effective in a number of BBN expert system efforts other than NLP and having a taxonomic knowledge base.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 159,
"end": 162,
"text": "[1]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why a Taxonomic Language",
"sec_num": "2.2."
},
{
"text": "In choosing NIKL to axiomatize the constants, one could use its built-in, incomplete inference algorithm, the classifier [27] . In Janus, the classifier is used only for consistency checking when modifying or loading the taxonomic network; any concepts or roles identiffed by the (classifier as identical are candidates for further axiomatization. Our semantic procedures do not need even as sophisticated an algorithm as the NIKL classifier; pre-compiled, pre-defined inference chains in the network are simpler, faster, and have proven adequate for NLP in our applications.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 121,
"end": 125,
"text": "[27]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF24"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Why a Taxonomic Language",
"sec_num": "2.2."
},
{
"text": "Choosing a taxonomic language, at least in current implementations, means that one is restricted to unary and binary predicates. However, this not a limitation in expressive power. One can represent a predicate P of n arguments via a unary predicate P' and n binary predicates, which is what we have done. (P rl ..... m) will be true iff the following expression is. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Representing Predicates of Arbitrary Arity",
"sec_num": "2.3.1."
},
{
"text": "Davidson [5] has argued for such a representation of processes on semantic grounds, since many event descriptors appear with a variable number of arguments.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 9,
"end": 12,
"text": "[5]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": ". (Rn b rn))",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Any concept name or role name in the network is a constant in the logical language. We use concepts only to represent sets of entities indexed by time and world. Roles are used only to represent sets of pairs of entities, i.e., binary relations. Given time and world indices potentially on each constant in WML, we must first state the role those indices play in the NIKL portion of the hybrid. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Time and World Indices",
"sec_num": "2.3.2."
},
{
"text": "(V x)((a x) = (a x)) (V x)((a x) = (3yX^(C y) (R x y))).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Time and World Indices",
"sec_num": "2.3.2."
},
{
"text": "(V x)(V t)(V w)((B x)(t..,] ~ (A x)[t.w]) (v x)(V O(V w)((B x)[t,w] (3 y)(^ (C y)[t.w] (R x y)[t.w])).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Time and World Indices",
"sec_num": "2.3.2."
},
{
"text": "Though this handles the overwhelming majority of constants we need to axiomatize, it does not allow for representing constants taking intensional arguments because the axioms above allow for quantification over extensions only)The semantics of predicates which should have intensions as arguments are unfortunately specified separately. Examples that have arisen in our applications involve changes in a reading on a scale, e.g., USS Stark's readiness downgraded from C1 to C4. 2 We would like to treat that sentence as:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 478,
"end": 479,
"text": "2",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Time and World Indices",
"sec_num": "2.3.2."
},
{
"text": "(^ (DOWNGRADE a) (SCALE a ([NTENS[ON Stark-readiness)) (PREVIOUS a C1) (NEW a C4)).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Time and World Indices",
"sec_num": "2.3.2."
},
{
"text": "That is, for the example we would like to treat the scale as intensional, but have no way to do so in NIKL. Therefore, we had to annotate the definition of downgrade outside of the formal semantics of NIKL. Only 0.1% of the 7,000 (root) word vocabulary in our applications could not be handled with NIKL. (The additional problematic vocabulary were upgrade, project, report, change, and expect.)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Time and World Indices",
"sec_num": "2.3.2."
},
{
"text": "Here we mention some of the issues we focussed on in developing Janus. The specification of WML appears in [15] ; specifications for NIKL appear in [22, 26] .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 107,
"end": 111,
"text": "[15]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 148,
"end": 152,
"text": "[22,",
"ref_id": "BIBREF20"
},
{
"start": 153,
"end": 156,
"text": "26]",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Example Representational Decisions",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "Few constants. One decision was to use as few constants as possible, deriving as many entities as possible using operators in the intensionai logic. In this section we illustrate this point by showing how definitely referenced sets, information about kinds, indefinitely identified sets, and generic information can be stated by derivation from a single constant whose extension is the set of all individuals of a particular class.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Example Representational Decisions",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "Some of the expressive power of the hybrid is illustrated below as it pertains to minimizing the constants needed From the constants BLACK-ENTITIES, GRAY-ENTITIES, CATS and MICE, the operators THE, POWER, KIND, and SAMPLE are used to derive the entities corresponding to definite sets, generic classes, and indefinite sets. In a semantic network without the hybrid, one might choose (or need) to represent each of our derived entities by a node in the network. Our use of the operator THE, and the operator POWER for definite plurals follows Scha [25] . The operators KIND and SAMPLE follow Cad.son's analysis [10] of the semantics of bare plurals. THE, as an operator, takes three arguments: a variable, a sort (unary predicate), and a proposition. Its denotation is the unique salient object in context such that it is in the sort and such that if the variable is bound to it, the proposition is true. POWER takes a sort as argument and produces the predicate corresponding to the power set of the set denoted by the sort. These operators are useful for representing definite plurals; the black cats would be represented as (THE x (POWER CATS) (BLACK-ENTITIES x)).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 547,
"end": 551,
"text": "[25]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF23"
},
{
"start": 610,
"end": 614,
"text": "[10]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Example Representational Decisions",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "vlt is possible that one could extend NIKL semantics to allow for inter~sional aK3uments . but this has not been done.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Example Representational Decisions",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "2An analogy in more common terminology would be His temperature dropped from 104 degrees to 99 degrees. SAMPLE takes the same arguments as THE, but indicates some set of entities satisfying the sort and proposition, not necessarily the largest set. KIND takes a sort as argument, and produces an individual representing the sort; its only use is for bare plurals that are surface subjects of a generic statement. If we are predicating something of a bare plural, KIND is used; for instance, cats as in cats are ferocious is represented as (KIND CATS). An indefinite set arising as a bare plural in a VP is represented using SAMPLE; for instance, gray mice as in Cats eat gray mice is represented as (SAMPLE x MICE (GRAY-ENTITIES x)).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Example Representational Decisions",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "The examples above demonstrate that an intensional logic enables derivation of many entities from fewer constants than would be needed in NIKL or other frame-based systems. The next example illustrates how the intensional logic lets us express some propositions that can be stated in many semantic network systems, but not in NIKL.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Example Representational Decisions",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "Cats eat mice are often encoded in a semantic network or frame system. This is not possible in the semantics of NIKL, but is possible in the hybrid. The structure in Figure 2 would not give the desired generic meaning, but rather would mean (ignoring time and world) that",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 166,
"end": 174,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generic assertions. Generic statements such as",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(V x) ((CATS x) = (3 y)(^ (MICE y)(EAT x y))),",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generic assertions. Generic statements such as",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "i.e., every cat eats some mouse.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generic assertions. Generic statements such as",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(1,oo) Again, following Carlson's linguistic analysis [10] , in the hybrid we would have a generic statement about the kind corresponding to cats, that these eat indefinitely specified sets of mice. GENERIC is an operator which produces a predicate on kinds, intuitively meaning that the resulting predicate is typically true of individuals of the kind that is its argument. Our formal representation (ignoring tense for simplicity) is",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 54,
"end": 58,
"text": "[10]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "EAT",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Next we illustrate a potential powerful feature of the hybrid which we have chosen not to exploit.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(GENERIC (LAMBDA (x) (EAT x(SAMPLE y MICE)))) (KIND CATS).",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Derivable definitions. The hybrid gives a powerful means of defining lexical items. To define pi/o~ one wants a predicate defining the set of people that typically are the actors in a flight, i.e.,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(GENERIC (LAMBDA (x) (EAT x(SAMPLE y MICE)))) (KIND CATS).",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(LAMBDA (x') { ^ (PERSON x') (GENERIC (LAMBDA (x) (3 y)(^ (FLYING-EVENT y) (ACTOR y x)))) x') })",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(GENERIC (LAMBDA (x) (EAT x(SAMPLE y MICE)))) (KIND CATS).",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Though the hybrid gives us the representational capacity to make such definitions, we have chosen as part of our design no_._tt to use it. For to use it, would mean stepping outside of NIKL to specify constants, and therefore, that the reasoning algorithms based on taxonomic semantics would not be the simple, efficient strategies, but rather might require arbitrarily complex theorem proving for expressions in intensional logic. 3",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(GENERIC (LAMBDA (x) (EAT x(SAMPLE y MICE)))) (KIND CATS).",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "By domain mode/we mean the set of axioms encoded in NIKL regarding the constants. The domain model serves several purposes in Janus. Of course, in defining the constants of our semantic representation language, it provides the constants that can appear in formulae that lexical items map to. For instance, vessel and ship map to VESSEL. In the example above regarding pilot, the constants were PER-SON, FLYING-EVENT, and ACTOR; in the formula \u2022 above stating that cats eat mice, the constants were EAT, MICE, and CATS,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Use of the Taxonomy in Janus",
"sec_num": "4."
},
{
"text": "In this section, we divide the discussion in three parts: current uses of the domain model in Janus; a plausible, but rejected use; and proposals for its use, but not yet implemented.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Use of the Taxonomy in Janus",
"sec_num": "4."
},
{
"text": "The domain model provides the semantic classes (or sorts of a sorted logic) that form the primitives for selection restrictions. Its use for this purpose is neither novel nor surprising, merely illustrative. In the case of deploy, a MILITARY-UNIT can be the logical subject, and the object of a phrase marked by to must be a LOCATION. Almost all selection restrictions are based on the semantic class of the entities described by a noun phrase. That is, almost all may be checked by using taxonomic knowledge regarding constants.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Selection Restrictions",
"sec_num": "4.1.1."
},
{
"text": "A table of semantic classes for the operators discussed earlier is provided in Figure 3 . Though the logical form for ~e carriers, all carriers, some carriers, a carrier, and carriers (both in the KIND and SAMPLE case) varies, the selection restriction must check the =USC/ISI [19] has proposed e first-order formula defining the set of items that have ever been the actor in a flight. Their definition is solely within NIKL using the QUA link [14] , which is exactly the set of fillers of a slot. While having eve._..rr flown could be a sense of pilot, it seems less useful than the sense of normally flying a plane.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 277,
"end": 281,
"text": "[19]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
},
{
"start": 444,
"end": 448,
"text": "[14]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 79,
"end": 87,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Selection Restrictions",
"sec_num": "4.1.1."
},
{
"text": "NIKL network for consistency between the constant CARRIERS and the constraint of the selection restriction. To see this, consider the case of command (in the sense of a military command) which requires that its direct object in active clauses be a MILITARY-UNIT and that its surface subject in passive clauses be a MILITARY-UNIT, i.e., its logical object must be a MILITARY-UNIT. Suppose USS Enterprise, carrier, and aircraft carrier all have semantic class CARRIER. Since an ancestor of CARRIER in the taxonomy is MILITARY-UNIT, each of those phrases satisfy the aforementioned selection restriction on the verb command. Phrases whose class does not have MILITARY-UNIT as an ancestor or as a descendent 4 will not satisfy the selection restriction. That is, definite evidence of consistency with the selection restriction is normally required.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Selection Restrictions",
"sec_num": "4.1.1."
},
{
"text": "Semantic Class",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Expression",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(THE x P (R x)) P (POWER P) P (KIND P) P (SAMPLE x P (R x)) P (LAMBDA x P (R x)) P",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Expression",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "There are three cases where more must be done. For pronouns, Janus saves selection restrictions that would apply to the pronoun's referent, later applying those constraints to eliminate candidate referents. Metonymy is an exception, discussed in Section 4.3.2. There are cases of selection restrictions requiring information additional to the semantic class, but these are checked against the type of the logical expression s for a noun phrase, rather than its semantic class only. Co/fide requires a set of agents. The type of a plural, for instance, is (SET P), where P is its semantic class. The selection restriction on collide could be represented as (SET PHYSICAL-OBJECT).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Figure 3: Relating Expressions to Classes s",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Have, with, and of, are highly polysemous. Some of their senses are very specific, frozen, and predictable, e.g., to have a col~ these senses may be itemized in the |exicon. However, other senses are vague, if considered in a domain-independent way; nevertheless, they must be resolved to precise meanings if accessing a data base, expert system, etc. US$ Frederick has a speed of 30 knots has this flavor, for the general sense is associating an attribute with an entity.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Highly Polysemous Words",
"sec_num": "4.1.2."
},
{
"text": "To handle such cases, we look for a relation R in the domain model which could be the domaindependent interpretation. If A has B, the B of A, or ,4 with B are input, the semantic interpreter looks for a role R from the class associated with A to the class associated with B. If no such role exists, the search is for a role relating the nearest ancestor of the class of A to any ancestor of the class of B. The implicit assumption is that items structured closely together in the domain model can be related with such vague words, and that items that can be related via such vague words will naturally have been organized closely together in the domain model.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Highly Polysemous Words",
"sec_num": "4.1.2."
},
{
"text": "While describing the procedure as a search, in fact, an explicit run-time search may not be necessary. All SUPERCs (ancestors) of a concept are compiled and stored when the taxonomy is loaded. All roles from one concept to another are also precompiled and stored, maintaining the distinction between roles that are explicit locally versus those that are compiled. Furthermore, the ancestors and role relations are indexed. One need only walk up the chain of ancestors if no locally defined role relates the two concepts, but some inherited (not locally defined) role does; then one walks up the ancestor chain(s) only to find the closest applicable role. Thus, in many cases, \"semantic reasoning\" is reduced to efficient table lookup.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Highly Polysemous Words",
"sec_num": "4.1.2."
},
{
"text": "Adopting WML offers the potential of simplifying the mapping from surface form to semantic representation, although it does increase the complexity of mapping from WML to executable code, such as SQL or expert system function calls. The mapping from intensional logic to executable code is beyond the scope of this paper; our first implementation was reported in [30] ; the current implementation will be described elsewhere.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 363,
"end": 367,
"text": "[30]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF27"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Relation to Underlying System",
"sec_num": "4.1.3."
},
{
"text": "This process makes use of a model of underlying system capabilities in which each element relates a set of domain model constants to a method for accessing the related information in the database, expert system, simulation program, etc. For example, the constant HARPOON-CAPABLE, which defines a set of vessels equipped with harpoon missiles, is associated with an undedying system model element which states how to select the subset of exactly those vessels. In a Navy relational data base that we have dealt with, the relevant code selects just those records of a table of unit characteristics with a \"Y\" in the HARP field.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Relation to Underlying System",
"sec_num": "4.1.3."
},
{
"text": "~Ne ched~ whether the constraint is a descendent of the class of the noun phrase to determine whether consistency is possible. For instance, if decom/ssion requires a VESSEL as the object of the de<:ommisioning, those units and they satisfy the selection constrainL SThe ruJels may need to be used tecureively to get to a constanL aEvery expression in WML has a type.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Relation to Underlying System",
"sec_num": "4.1.3."
},
{
"text": "We have developed two complementary tools to greatly increase our productivity in porting BBN's Janus NL understanding and generation system to new domains. IRACQ [3] supports learning lexical semantics from examples with only one unknown word. IRACQ is used for acquiring the diverse, complex patterns of syntax and semantics arising from verbs, by providing examples of the verb's usage, Since IRACQ assumes that a large vocabulary is available for use in the training examples,\" a way to rapidly infer the knowledge bases for the overwhelming majority of words is an invaluable complement.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 163,
"end": 166,
"text": "[3]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4.1.\u00a2 Knowledge Acquisition",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "KNACQ [33] serves that purpose. The domain model is used to organize, guide, and assist in acquiring the syntax and semantics of domain-specific vocabulary. Using the browsing facilities, graphical views, and consistency checker of KREME [1] on NIKL taxonomies, one may select any concept or role for knowledge acquisition. KNACQ presents the user with a few questions and menus to elicit the English expressions used to refer to. that concept or role.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 6,
"end": 10,
"text": "[33]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF30"
},
{
"start": 238,
"end": 241,
"text": "[1]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4.1.\u00a2 Knowledge Acquisition",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To illustrate the kinds of information that must be acquired consider the examples in Figure 4 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 86,
"end": 94,
"text": "Figure 4",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4.1.\u00a2 Knowledge Acquisition",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To handle these one would have to acquire information on lexical syntax, lexical semantics, and mapping to expert system structure for all words not in the domain-independent dictionary. For purposes of this exposition, assume that the words, vessel, speed, Vinson, CROVL, C3, and deploy are to be defined. A vessel has a speed of 20 knots or a vessel's speed is 20 knots would be understood from domainindependent semantic rules regarding have and be, once lexical information for vessel and speed is acquired. In acquiring the definitions of vessel and speed, the system should infer interpretations for phrases such as the speed of a vessel, the vessel's speed, and the vessel speed.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The vessel speed of Vinson The vessels with speed above 20 knots The vessel's speed is 5 knots Vinson has speed less than 20 knots Its speed Which vessels have a CROVL of C3? Which vessels are deployed C3? Figure 4: Examples for Knowledge Acquisition",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Given the current implementation, the required knowledge for the words vessel, speed, and CROVL is most efficiently acquired using KNACQ; names of instances of classes, such as Vinson and C3 are automatically inferred from instances; and knowledge about deploy and its derivatives would be acquired via IRACQ.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The vessel speed of Vinson The vessels with speed above 20 knots The vessel's speed is 5 knots Vinson has speed less than 20 knots Its speed Which vessels have a CROVL of C3? Which vessels are deployed C3? Figure 4: Examples for Knowledge Acquisition",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To illustrate this acquistion centered around the domain model, consider acquistion centered around roles. At~'ibutes are binary relations on classes that can be phrased as the <relation> of a <class>. For instance, suppose CURRENT-SPEED is a binary relation relating vesselis to SPEED, a subclass of ONE-D-MEASUREMENT. An attribute treatment is the most appropriate, for the speed of a vessel makes perfect sense. KNACQ asks the user for one or more English phrases associated with this functional role; the user response in this case is speed. That answer is sufficient to enable the system to understand the kernel noun-phrases listed in Figure 5 . -Since ONE-D-MEASUREMENT is the range of the relation, the software knows that statistical operations such as average and maximum apply to speed. The lexical information inferred is used compositionally with the syntactic rules, domain independent semantic rules, and other lexical semantic rules. Therefore, the generative capacity of the lexical semantic and syntactic information is linguistically very great, as one would require. A small subset of the examples illustrating this without introducing new domain specific lexical items appears in Figure 5 . Some lexicalizations of roles do not fall within the attribute category. For these, a more general class of regularities is captured by the notion of caseframe rules. Suppose we have a role UNIT-OF, relating CASREP and MILITARY-UNIT. KNACQ asks the user which subset of the following six patterns in Figure 6 are appropriate plus the prepositions that are appropriate.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 641,
"end": 649,
"text": "Figure 5",
"ref_id": "FIGREF4"
},
{
"start": 1201,
"end": 1209,
"text": "Figure 5",
"ref_id": "FIGREF4"
},
{
"start": 1512,
"end": 1520,
"text": "Figure 6",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The vessel speed of Vinson The vessels with speed above 20 knots The vessel's speed is 5 knots Vinson has speed less than 20 knots Its speed Which vessels have a CROVL of C3? Which vessels are deployed C3? Figure 4: Examples for Knowledge Acquisition",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "1. <CASREP> is <PREP> <MILITARY-UNIT> 2. <CASREP> <PREP> <MILITARY-UNIT> 3. <MILITARY-UNIT> <CASREP> 4. <MILITARY-UNIT> is <PREP> <CASREP> 5. <MILITARY-UNIT> <PREP> <CASREP> 6. <CASREP> <MILITARY-UNIT> Figure 6 : Patterns for the Caseframe Rules For this example, the user would select patterns (1), (2) , and (3) and select for, on. and of as prepositions. 7",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 300,
"end": 303,
"text": "(2)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 202,
"end": 210,
"text": "Figure 6",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The vessel speed of Vinson The vessels with speed above 20 knots The vessel's speed is 5 knots Vinson has speed less than 20 knots Its speed Which vessels have a CROVL of C3? Which vessels are deployed C3? Figure 4: Examples for Knowledge Acquisition",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The information acquired through KNACQ is used both by the understanding components and by BBN's Spokesman generation components for paraphrasing, for providing clarification responses, and for answers in English. Mapping from the WML structures to lexical items is accomplished using rules acquired with KNACQ, as well as handcrafted mapping rules for lexical items not directly associated with concepts or roles.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The vessel speed of Vinson The vessels with speed above 20 knots The vessel's speed is 5 knots Vinson has speed less than 20 knots Its speed Which vessels have a CROVL of C3? Which vessels are deployed C3? Figure 4: Examples for Knowledge Acquisition",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Selected Though the domain model is central to the semantic processing of Janus, we have not used it in all possible ways, but only where there seems to be clear benefit.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Where an Alternative Mechanism was",
"sec_num": "4.2."
},
{
"text": "In telegraphic language, omitted prepositions, as in List the creation date file B, may arise. Alternatively, if the NLP system is part of a speech understanding system, prepositions are among the most difficult words to recognize reliably. Omitted prepositions could be treated with the same heuristic as implemented for interpreting the meaning of have, with, and of. However, we have chosen a different inference technique for omitted prepositions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Where an Alternative Mechanism was",
"sec_num": "4.2."
},
{
"text": "Though one could represent selection restrictions directly in a taxonomy (as reported in [7, 29] ), selection restrictions in Janus are stored separately, indexed by the semantic class of the head word. We believe it more likely that Janus will have the selectional pattern involving the omitted preposition, than that the omitted preposition corresponds to a usage unknown to Janus and inferable from the domain model relations. Consequently, Janus applies the selection restrictions corresponding to all senses of the known head, to find what senses are consistent with the proposed phrase and with what prepositions. In practice, this gives rise to far fewer possibilities than considering all relations possible whether or not they can be expressed with a preposition.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 89,
"end": 92,
"text": "[7,",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
},
{
"start": 93,
"end": 96,
"text": "29]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF26"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Where an Alternative Mechanism was",
"sec_num": "4.2."
},
{
"text": "In this section, we speculate regarding some possible future work based on further exploiting the domain model and hybrid representation system described in this paper.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Future Directions)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "7Normally, if pattern (1) is valid, pattern (2) will be as well and vice versa. Similarly, if pattern (4) is valid, pattern (5) will normally be also. As a result, the menu items are coupled by default (selecting (1) automatically selects (2) and vice versa), but this default may be simply overridden by selecting either and then decelecting the other. The most frequent examples where one does not have the coupling of these patterns is the preposition of.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Future Directions)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "It has long been observed [11 ] that mention of one class of entities in a communication can bring into the foreground other classes of entities which can be referred to though not explicitly introduced.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 26,
"end": 31,
"text": "[11 ]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "An Approach to Bridging",
"sec_num": "4.3.1."
},
{
"text": "The process of inferring the referent when such a reference occurs has been called bridging [12] . Some examples, taken from [12] , appear below, where the reference requiring bridging is underlined. We believe a taxonomic domain model provides the basis for an efficient algorithm for a broad class of examples of bridging, though we do not believe that it will cover all cases. If A is the class of a discourse entity arising from previous utterances, then any entity of class B, such that the NIKL domain model has a role from A to B (or from B to A) can be referred to by a definite NP. This has not yet been integrated into the Janus model of reference processing [4] .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 92,
"end": 96,
"text": "[12]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 125,
"end": 129,
"text": "[12]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 669,
"end": 672,
"text": "[4]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "An Approach to Bridging",
"sec_num": "4.3.1."
},
{
"text": "Unstated relations in a communication must be inferred for full understanding of nominal compounds and metonymy. Those that can be anticipated can be built into the lexicon; the challenge is to deal with those that are novel to Janus. Finding the omitted relation in novel nominal compounds using a taxonomy has been explored and reported elsewhere [13] .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 349,
"end": 353,
"text": "[13]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Metonymy",
"sec_num": "4.3.2."
},
{
"text": "We propose treating many novel cases of metonymy in the following way:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Metonymy",
"sec_num": "4.3.2."
},
{
"text": "1. Wherepatterns of metonymy can be identified,, such as using a description of a part to refer to the whole (and other patterns identified in [17] ), pro-compile chains of relations between classes in the domain model, e.g., (PART-OF A B) where A and B are concepts.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 143,
"end": 147,
"text": "[17]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Metonymy",
"sec_num": "4.3.2."
},
{
"text": "In processing an input, when a selection restriction on an NP fails, record the failed restriction with the partial interpretation for possible future processing, after all attempts at a literal interpretation of the input have failed.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "3. If no literal interpretation of the input can be found, look among the precompiled relations of step 1 above for any class that could be so related to the class of the NP that appears.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "4. If a relation is applicable, attempt to resume interpretation assuming the referent of the NP is in the related class.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This has not been implemented, but offers an efficient alternative to the abductive theorem-proving approach described in [16] .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 122,
"end": 126,
"text": "[16]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Abstractions in the NIKL Taxonomy WML and NIKL together provide a framework for representation. The highest concepts and relations in the NIKL network provide a representational style in which more concrete constantsmust fit. The first abstraction structure used in Janus was the USC/ISI \"upper structure\" [19] . Because it seemed tied to systemic linguistics in critical ways, rather than to a more general ontological style, we have replaced it with another domain-independent set of concepts and roles.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 306,
"end": 310,
"text": "[19]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "For any application domain, all domaindependent constants must fit underneath the domainindependent structure.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "The domain-independent taxonomy consists of 70 concepts and 24 roles currently, but certainly could be further expanded as one attempts to further axiomatize and model notions useful in a broad class of application domains.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "During the evolution of Janus, we explored whether the domain-independent taxonomy could be greatly expanded by a broad set of primitives used in the Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English [18] (LDOCE) to define domain-independent constants. LDOCE defines approximately 56,000 words in terms of a base vocabulary of roughly 2,000 items, s We estimate that about 20,000 concepts and roles should be defined corresponding to the 2,000 multiway ambiguous words in the base vocabulary. The appeal, of course, is that if these basic notions were sufficient to define 56,000 words, they are generally applicable, providing a candidate for general-purpose primitives.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "The course of action we followed was to build a taxonomy for all of the definitions of approximately 200 items from the base vocabulary using the defini. tJons of those vocabulary items themselves in the dictionary. In this attempt, we encountered the following difficulties:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Definitions of the base vocabulary often involved circularity.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Definitions included assertional information and/or knowledge appropriate in defeasible reasoning, which are not fully supported by NIKL. For example, the first definition of cat is \"a small four-legged animal with soft fur and sharp claws, often kept as a pet or for catching mice or rats.\"",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Multiple views and/or vague definitions and usage arose in LDOCE. For instance, the e'rhough the authors of LDOCE definitions try to stay within the base vocabulary, exceptions do arise such as diagrams and proper nouns, e.g., Catholic Church. second definition of cat (p. 150) is \"an animal related to this such as the lion or tiger\" (italics added). Such a vague definition helped us little in axiomatizing the notion.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "Thus, we decided that hand-crafted abstractions would be needed to axiomatize by hand the LDOCE base vocabulary if general-purpose primitives were to result. On the other hand, concrete concepts corresponding to a lower level of abstraction seem obtainable from LDOCE. In particular the LDOCE definitions of units of measurement for the avoirdupois and metric systems were very useful. A more detailed analysis of our experience is presented in [23] .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 445,
"end": 449,
"text": "[23]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Top-Level",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "Several hybrid representation schemes have been created, although only ours seems to have explored a hybrid of intensional logic with an axiomatizable frame system. The most directly related efforts are the following:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "6."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 KL-TWO [31] , which marries a frame system (NIKL) with propositional logic (RUP [20] ), Limited inference in propositional logic is the goal of KL-'FWO. Limited aspects of universal\" quantification are achieved via allowing demons in the inference process. KL-TWO and its classification algorithm [27] are at the heart of the lexicalization process of the text generator Penman [28] .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 9,
"end": 13,
"text": "[31]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF28"
},
{
"start": 82,
"end": 86,
"text": "[20]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF18"
},
{
"start": 299,
"end": 303,
"text": "[27]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF24"
},
{
"start": 380,
"end": 384,
"text": "[28]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF25"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "6."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 KRYPTON [9] , which marries a frame system with first-order logic. The frame system is designed to be less expressive than NIKL to allow rapid checking for disjointness of two class concepts in order to support efficient resolution theorem proving. KRYPTON has not as yet been used in any natural language processor.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 10,
"end": 13,
"text": "[9]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "6."
},
{
"text": "Our conclusions regarding the hybrid representation approach of intensional logic plus NIKL-based axioms to define constants are based on three kinds of efforts:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Bringing Janus up on two large expert system and data base applications within DARPA's Battle Management Programs. The combined lexicon in the effort is approximately 7,000 words (not counting morphological variations).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 The efforts synopsized in Section 5 towards general purpose domain notions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Experience in developing IRACQ and KNACQ, acquisition tools integrated with the domain model acquisition and maintenance facility KREME, First, a taxonomic language with a formal semantics can supplement a higher order logic in support of efficient, limited inferences needed in a naturaJ language processor. Based on our experience and that of others, the axioms and limited inference algorithms can be used for classes of anaphora resolution, interpretation of have, with, and of, finding omitted relations in novel nominal compounds, applying selection restrictions, and mapping from the semantic representation of the input to code to carry out the user's request.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "Second, an intensional logic can supplement a taxonomic language in trying to define word senses formally. Our effort with LDOCE definitions showed how little support is provided for defining word senses in a taxonomic language. A positive contribution of intensional logic is the ability to distinguish universal statements from generic ones from existential ones; definite sets from unspecified ones; and necessary and sufficient information from assertional information, allowing for a representation closer to the semantics of English.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "Third, the hybridization of axioms for taxonomic knowledge with an intensional logic does not allow us to represent all that we would like to, but does provide a very effective engineering approach. Out of 7,000 lexical entries (not counting morphological variations), only 0.1% represented concepts inappropriate for the formal semantics of NIKL.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "The ability to pre-compile pre-specified, inferential chains, to index them via concept name and role name, and to employ taxonomic inheritance for organizing knowledge were critical in selecting taxor~omic representation to supplement WML. These techniques of pre-compiling pre-specified inferential chains and of indexing them should also be applicable to other knowledge representations than taxonomies.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "7."
},
{
"text": "At a later date, we hope to quantify the effectiveness of the semantic heuristics described in this paper.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": "7."
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "This research was supported by the Advanced Research Projects Agency of the Department of Defense and was monitored by ONR under Contracts N00014-85-C-0079 and N00014-85-C-0016. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the author and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency or the U.S. Government. This brief report represents a total team effort. Significant contributions were made by Damaris Ayuso, Rusty Bobrow, Ira Haimowitz, Erhard Hinrichs, Thomas Reinhardt, Remko Scha, David Stallard, and Cynthia Whipple. We also wish to acknowledge many discussions with William Mann and Norman Sondheimer in the early phases of the project.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgements",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "~l'he KREME Knowledge Editing Environment'. /nt",
"authors": [
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Abrett",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Burstein",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1987,
"venue": "J. Man-Machine Studies",
"volume": "27",
"issue": "",
"pages": "103--126",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Abrett, G. and Burstein, M. ~l'he KREME Knowledge Editing Environment'. /nt. J. Man-Machine Studies 27 (1987), 103-126.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "The Logical Interpretation of Noun Compounds",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ayuso",
"middle": [],
"last": "Planes",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Master Th., Massachusetts Institute of Technology",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ayuso Planes, D. The Logical Interpretation of Noun Compounds. Master Th., Massachusetts In- stitute of Technology,June 1985.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "An Environment for Acquiring Semantic Information",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Ayuso",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "V",
"middle": [],
"last": "Shaked",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Weischedel",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1987,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "32--40",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ayuso, D.M., Shaked, V., and Weischedel, R.M. An Environment for Acquiring Semantic Information. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the As- sociation for Computational Linguistics, ACL, 1987, pp. 32-40.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Discourse Entities in Janus",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Damaris",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ayuso",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1989,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ayuso, Damaris. Discourse Entities in Janus. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the As- sociation for Computational Linguistics, 1989.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "A Guide to IRUS-II Application Development in the FCCBMP",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Bbn",
"middle": [],
"last": "Systems",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Technologies",
"middle": [],
"last": "Corp",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1988,
"venue": "BBN Systems and Technologies Corp",
"volume": "6859",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "BBN Systems and Technologies Corp. A Guide to IRUS-II Application Development in the FCCBMP. BBN Report 6859, BBN Systems and Technologies Corp., Cambridge, MA, 1988.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "PSI-KLONE: Parsing and Semantic Interpretation in the BBN Natural Language Understanding System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bobrow",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "B",
"middle": [],
"last": "Webber",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1980,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 1980 Conference of the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Bobrow, R. and Webber, B. PSI-KLONE: Parsing and Semantic Interpretation in the BBN Natural Lan- guage Understanding System. Proceedings of the 1980 Conference of the Canadian Society for Com- putational Studies of Intelligence, CSCSVSCEIO, May, 1980.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Knowledge Representation for Syntactic/Semantic Processing",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bobrow",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "B",
"middle": [],
"last": "Webber",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1980,
"venue": "Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Bobrow, R. and Webber, B. Knowledge Represen- tation for Syntactic/Semantic Processing. Proceed- ings of the National Conference on Artificial Intel- ligence, AAAI, August, 1980.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "An Overview of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Brachman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"G"
],
"last": "Schmolze",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Cognitive Science",
"volume": "9",
"issue": "2",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Brachman, R.J. and Schmolze, J.G. \"An Overview of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System\". Cognitive Science 9, 2 (April 1985).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "An Essential Hybrid Reasoning System: Knowledge and Symbol Level Accounts of Krypton",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Brachman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "V",
"middle": [
"P"
],
"last": "Gilbert",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Levesque",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Proceedings of UCAI85, International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "532--539",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Brachman, R.J., Gilbert, V.P., and Levesque, H.J. An Essential Hybrid Reasoning System: Knowledge and Symbol Level Accounts of Krypton. Proceedings of UCAI85, International Joint Conferences on Artifi- cial Intelligence, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, August, 1985, pp. 532-539.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Reference to Kinds in English",
"authors": [
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cad.Son",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1979,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Cad.son, G.. Reference to Kinds in English. Gar- land Press, New York, 1979.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Discourse Structure and Human Knowledge. In Language Comprehension and the Acquisition of Knowledge",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chafe",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1972,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Chafe, W. Discourse Structure and Human Knowledge. In Language Comprehension and the Acquisition of Knowledge, Winston and Sons, Washington, 1972.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing",
"authors": [
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Clark",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bridging",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1975,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "169--174",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Clark, H.H. Bridging. Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing, 1975, pp. 169-174.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "The Semantic Interpretation of Nominal Compounds",
"authors": [
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [
"W"
],
"last": "Finin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1980,
"venue": "Proceedings of The First Annual National Conference on Artificial Intelligence",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "310--312",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Finin, T.W. The Semantic Interpretation of Nominal Compounds. Proceedings of The First An- nual National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, The American Association for Artificial Intelligence, August, 1980, pp. 310-312.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "Proceedings of the 1981 KL-ONE Workshop, Bolt Beranek and",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Freeman",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "The",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Link",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "55--65",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Freeman, M. The QUA Link. Proceedings of the 1981 KL-ONE Workshop, Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., 1982, pp. 55-65.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "The Syntax and Semantics of the JANUS Semantic Interpretation Language",
"authors": [
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [
"W"
],
"last": "Hinrichs",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Ayuso",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Scha",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Research and Development in Natural Language Understanding as Part of the Strategic Computing Program",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "27--31",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hinrichs, E.W., Ayuso, D.M., and Scha, R. The Syntax and Semantics of the JANUS Semantic Inter- pretation Language. In Research and Development in Natural Language Understanding as Part of the Strategic Computing Program, Annual Technical Report December 1985. December 1986, BBN Laboratories, Report No. 6522, 1987, pp. 27-31.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Interpretation as Abduction",
"authors": [
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hobbs",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1988,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "95--103",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hobbs, et. al. Interpretation as Abduction. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the As- sociation for Computational Linguistics, 1988, pp. 95-103.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Metaphors We Live By",
"authors": [
{
"first": "G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lakoff",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Johnson",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1980,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M.. Metaphors We Live By. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1980.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "USC/Information Sciences Institute",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Mann",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Y",
"middle": [],
"last": "Arens",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Matthiessen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Naberschnig",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "N",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Sondheimer",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "",
"volume": "2",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Mann, W.C., Arens, Y., Matthiessen, C., Naberschnig, S., and Sondheimer, N.K. Janus Abstraction Structure --Draft 2. USC/Information Sciences Institute, 1985.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "Reasoning Utility Package User's Manual. AI Memo 667, Massachusetts Institute of Technology",
"authors": [
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Mcailester",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "Artificial Intelligence Laboratory",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "David A. McAIlester. Reasoning Utility Package User's Manual. AI Memo 667, Massachusetts In- stitute of Technology, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, April, 1982.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English. In Approaches to Natural Language",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Richard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Montague",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1973,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "221--242",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Montague, Richard. The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English. In Approaches to Natural Language, J. Hintikka, J. Moravcsik and P. Suppes, Eds., Reidel, Dordrecht, 1973, pp. 221-242.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "An Overview of NIKL, the New Implementation of KL-ONE",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [
"G"
],
"last": "Moser",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "Research in Knowledge Representation for NaturaJ Language Understanding -AnnuaJ Report, I",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "7--26",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Moser, M.G. An Overview of NIKL, the New Im- plementation of KL-ONE. In Research in Knowledge Representation for NaturaJ Language Understanding - AnnuaJ Report, I September 1982 -31 August 1983, Sidner, C. L., et al., Eds., BBN Laboratories Report No. 5421, 1983, pp. 7-26.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "Summary of Conclusions from the Longman's Taxonomy Experiment",
"authors": [
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [],
"last": "Reinhardt",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Whipple",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1988,
"venue": "BBN Systems and Technologies Corporation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Reinhardt, T. and Whipple, C. Summary of Con- clusions from the Longman's Taxonomy Experiment. In Goodman, B., Ed.,, BBN Systems and Tech- nologies Corporation, Cambridge, MA, 1988, pp..",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF22": {
"ref_id": "b22",
"title": "Knowledge Representation languages and the Predicate Calculus: How to Have Your Cake and Eat It Too",
"authors": [],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "193--196",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "24. Rich, C. Knowledge Representation languages and the Predicate Calculus: How to Have Your Cake and Eat It Too. Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI, August, 1982, pp. 193-196.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF23": {
"ref_id": "b23",
"title": "KL-ONE: Semantics and Classification",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Scha",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Stallard",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Multi-Level Plurals",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"G"
],
"last": "Distributivity ; Schmolze",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Israel",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "26th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "26",
"issue": "",
"pages": "27--39",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Scha, R. and Stallard, D. Multi-level Plurals and Distributivity. 26th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Com- putational Linguistics, June, 1988, pp. 17-24. 26. Schmolze, J. G., and Israel, D.J. KL-ONE: Semantics and Classification. In Research in Knowledge Representation for Natural Language Un- derstanding -Annual Report, 1 September 1982 -31 August 1983, Sidner, C.L., et al., Eds., BBN Laboratories Report No. 5421, 1983, pp. 27-39.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF24": {
"ref_id": "b24",
"title": "Classification in the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"G"
],
"last": "Schmolze",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "T",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Lipkis",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1983,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Schmolze, J.G., Lipkis, T.A. Classification in the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System. Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Con- ference on Artificial Intelligence, 1983.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF25": {
"ref_id": "b25",
"title": "A Logical-form and Knowledge-base Design for Natural Language Generation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "N",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Sondheimer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "B",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nebel",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "Proceedings AAAI-86 Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "612--618",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sondheimer, N. K. and Nebel, B. A Logical-form and Knowledge-base Design for Natural Language Generation. Proceedings AAAI-86 Fifth National Con- ference on Artificial Intelligence, The American As- sociation for Artificial Intelligence, Los Altos, CA, Aug, 1986, pp. 612-618.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF26": {
"ref_id": "b26",
"title": "Semantic Interpretation Using KL-ONE",
"authors": [
{
"first": "N",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Sondheimer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Weischedel",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Bobrow",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1984,
"venue": "Proceedings of COLING-84 and the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "101--107",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sondheimer, N.K., Weischedel, R.M., and Bobrow, R.J. Semantic Interpretation Using KL-ONE. Proceedings of COLING-84 and the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguis- tics, Association for Computational Linguistics, Stan- ford, CA, July, 1984, pp. 101-107.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF27": {
"ref_id": "b27",
"title": "Answering Questions Posed in an Intensional Logic: A Multilevel Semantics Approach",
"authors": [
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Stallard",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1987,
"venue": "Research and Development in Natural Language Understanding as Part of the Strategic Computing Program",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "35--47",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Stallard, David. Answering Questions Posed in an Intensional Logic: A Multilevel Semantics Ap- proach. In Research and Development in Natural Language Understanding as Part of the Strategic Computing Program, R. Weischedel, D.Ayuso, A. Haas, E. Hinrichs, R. Scha, V. Shaked, D. Stallard, Eds., BBN Laboratories, Cambridge, Mass., 1987, ch. 4, pp. 35-47. Report No. 6522.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF28": {
"ref_id": "b28",
"title": "The Restricted Language Architecture of a Hybrid Representation System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vilain",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Proceedings of IJCAI85, International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "547--551",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Vilain, M. The Restricted Language Architecture of a Hybrid Representation System. Proceedings of IJCAI85, International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, August, 1985, pp. 547-551.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF29": {
"ref_id": "b29",
"title": "Knowledge Representation and Natural Language Processing",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Weischedel",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "Proceedings of the/EEE",
"volume": "74",
"issue": "",
"pages": "905--920",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Weischedel, R.M. \"Knowledge Representation and Natural Language Processing\". Proceedings of the/EEE 74, 7 (July 1986), 905-920.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF30": {
"ref_id": "b30",
"title": "Portability in the Janus Natural Language Interface. Notebook of Speech and Natural Language Workshop",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Weischedel",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bobrow",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Ayuso",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ramshaw",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1989,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Weischedel, R.M., Bobrow, R., Ayuso, D.M., and Ramshaw, L. Portability in the Janus Natural Lan- guage Interface. Notebook of Speech and Natural Language Workshop, 1989. To be reprinted by Mor- gan Kaufmann Publishers.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null,
"uris": null,
"text": ") (^ (r ]:)) (R1 b r].) (R2 b r2) .."
},
"FIGREF1": {
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null,
"uris": null,
"text": "Two Typical Facts Stated in NIKL In a first-order extensional logic, the normal semantics of SUPERC and of roles in NIKL are well defined [26]. For instance, the diagram in figure 1 would mean"
},
"FIGREF2": {
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null,
"uris": null,
"text": "Due to a suggestion by David Stallard, we have chosen to interpret SUPERC and the role link similarly, but interpreted under modal necessity, i.e., as propositions true at all times in all worlds. Thus in the diagram inFigure 1, (A z), (B z), (C z), and (R x y) are intensions, i.e., functions with arguments of time and world [t, w] to extensions. Rewriting the axioms above by quantifying over all times and worlds, the axioms for the diagram inFigure 1in the hybrid representation are"
},
"FIGREF3": {
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null,
"uris": null,
"text": "Illustration Distinguishing NIKL Networks from other Semantic Nets"
},
"FIGREF4": {
"type_str": "figure",
"num": null,
"uris": null,
"text": "Attribute Examples"
}
}
}
} |