File size: 69,068 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 | {
"paper_id": "P96-1028",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T09:02:44.432029Z"
},
"title": "Evaluating the Portability of Revision Rules for Incremental Summary Generation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jacques",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robin",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": "jr@di.ufpe.br"
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "This paper presents a quantitative evaluation of the portability to the stock market domain of the revision rule hierarchy used by the system STREAK to incrementally generate newswire sports summaries. The evaluation consists of searching a test corpus of stock market reports for sentence pairs whose (semantic and syntactic) structures respectively match the triggering condition and application result of each revision rule. The results show that at least 59% of all rule classes are fully portable, with at least another 7% partially portable.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P96-1028",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "This paper presents a quantitative evaluation of the portability to the stock market domain of the revision rule hierarchy used by the system STREAK to incrementally generate newswire sports summaries. The evaluation consists of searching a test corpus of stock market reports for sentence pairs whose (semantic and syntactic) structures respectively match the triggering condition and application result of each revision rule. The results show that at least 59% of all rule classes are fully portable, with at least another 7% partially portable.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "The project STREAK 1 focuses on the specific issues involved in generating short, newswire style, natural language texts that summarize vast amount of input tabular data in their historical context. A series of previous publications presented complementary aspects of this project: motivating corpus analysis in (Robin and McKeown, 1993) , new revision-based text generation model in (Robin, 1993) , system implementation and rule base in (Robin, 1994a) and empirical evaluation of the robustness and scalability of this new model as compared to the traditional single pass pipeline model in (Robin and McKeown, 1995) . The present paper completes this series by describing a second, empirical, corpus-based evaluation, this time quantifying the portability to another domain (the stock market) of the revision rule hierarchy acquired in the sports domain and implemented in STREAK. The goal of this paper is twofold:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 312,
"end": 337,
"text": "(Robin and McKeown, 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 384,
"end": 397,
"text": "(Robin, 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 439,
"end": 453,
"text": "(Robin, 1994a)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 592,
"end": 617,
"text": "(Robin and McKeown, 1995)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "(1) assessing the generality of this particular rule hierarchy and (2) providing a general, semi-automatic 1 Surface Text Reviser Expressing Additional Knowledge. methodology for evaluating the portability of semantic and syntactic knowledge structures used for natural language generation. The results reveal that at least 59% of the revision rule hierarchy abstracted from the sports domain could also be used to incrementally generate the complex sentences observed in a corpus of stock market reports.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "I start by providing the context of the evaluation with a brief overview of STREAK's revision-based generation model, followed by some details about the empirical acquisition of its revision rules from corpus data. I then present the methodology of this evaluation, followed by a discussion of its quantitative results. Finally, I compare this evaluation with other empirical evaluations in text generation and conclude by discussing future directions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "An overview of STREAK",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The project STREAK was initially motivated by analyzing a corpus of newswire summaries written by professional sportswriters 2. This analysis revealed four characteristics of summaries that challenge the capabilities of previous text generators: concise linguistic forms, complex sentences, optional and background facts opportunistically slipped as modifiers of obligatory facts and high paraphrasing power. By greatly increasing the number of content planning and linguistic realization options that the generator must consider, as well as the mutual constraints among them, these characteristics make generating summaries in a single pass impractical. The example run given in Fig. 1 illustrates how STREAK overcomes these difficulties. It first generates a simple draft sentence that contains only the obligatory facts to include in any game report (location, date, game result and key player statistic). It then applies a series of revision rules 3, each one 2This 800,000 word corpus covers a whole NBA (National Basketball Association) season.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 680,
"end": 686,
"text": "Fig. 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "3In Fig. 1 , the nile used is indicated above each re- \"Dallas, TX -Charles Barkley tied a season high with 42 points and Danny Ainge came off the bench to add 21 Sunday as the Phoenix Suns handed the Dallas Mavericks their league worst 13th straight home defeat 123-97.\" opportunistically adding a new fact 4 that either:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 4,
"end": 10,
"text": "Fig. 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Complements an Mready included fact (e.g., revision of sentence 2 into 3).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Justifies its relevance by providing its historical background (e.g., revision of sentence 1 into 2).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Some of these revisions are non-monotonic,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "rewording 5 a draft fact to more concisely accommodate the additional fact (e.g., revision of sentence 1 into 2). Popping additional facts from a priority stack, STREAK stops revising when the summary vised sentence. 4Highlighted in bold in Fig. 1 . 5In Fig. 1 , words that get deleted are italicized and words that get modified are underlined.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 241,
"end": 247,
"text": "Fig. 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
},
{
"start": 254,
"end": 260,
"text": "Fig. 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Charles Barldey scored 42 points. Those 42 points equal his best scoring performance of the season. Danny Ainge is a teammate of Barkley. They play for the Phoenix Suns. Ainge is a reserve player. Yet he scored 21 points. The high scoring performances by Barkley and Ainge helped the Suns defeat the Dallas Mavericks. The Mavericks played on their homecourt in Texas. They had already lost their 12 previous games there. No other team in the league has lost so many games in a row at home. The final score was 123-97. The game was played Sunday. While STREAK generates only single sentences, those complex sentences convey as much information as whole paragraphs made of simple sentences, only far more fluently and concisely. This is illustrated by the 12 sentence paragraph 6 of Fig. 2 , which paraphrases sentence 6 of Fig. 1 . Because they express facts essentially independently of one another, such multi-sentence paragraphs are much easier to generate than the complex single sentences generated by STREAK.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 781,
"end": 787,
"text": "Fig. 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF1"
},
{
"start": 822,
"end": 828,
"text": "Fig. 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The rules driving the revision process in STREAK were acquired by reverse engineering 7 about 300 corpus sentences. These sentences were initially classified in terms of:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 The combination of domain concepts they expressed.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 The thematic role and top-level syntactic category used for each of these concepts.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "6This paragraph was not generated by STREAK, it is shown here only for contrastive purposes.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "v i.e., analyzing how they could be incrementally generated through gradual revisions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The resulting classes, called realization patterns, abstract the mapping from semantic to syntactic structure by factoring out lexical material and syntactic details. Two examples of realization patterns are given in Fig. 3 . Realization patterns were then grouped into surface decrement pairs consisting of:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 217,
"end": 223,
"text": "Fig. 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 A more complex pattern (called the target pattern).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 A simpler pattern (called the source pattern) that is structurally the closest to the target pattern among patterns with one less concept s .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The structural transformations from source to target pattern in each surface decrement pair were then hierarchically classified, resulting in the revision rule hierarchy shown in Fig. 4 -10. For example, the surface decrement pair < R~, R 1 >, shown in Fig. 3 , is one of the pairs from which the revision rule Adjunctization of Range into Instrument, shown in Fig. 10 was abstracted.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 179,
"end": 185,
"text": "Fig. 4",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 253,
"end": 259,
"text": "Fig. 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
},
{
"start": 361,
"end": 368,
"text": "Fig. 10",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "It involves displacing the Range argument of the source clause as an Instrument adjunct to accommodate a new verb and its argument. This revision rule is a sibling of the rule Adjunctization of Created into Instrument used to revise sentence i into 2 in STREAK'S run shown in Fig. 1 (where the Created argument role \"42 points\" of the verb \"to score\" in I becomes an Instrument adjunct in 2).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 276,
"end": 282,
"text": "Fig. 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The bottom level of the revision rule hierarchy specifies the side revisions that are orthogonal and sometimes accompany the restructuring revisions discussed up to this point. Side revisions do not make the draft more informative, but instead improve its style, conciseness and unambiguity. For example, when STREAK revises sentence (3) into (4) in the example run of Fig. 1 , the Agent of the absorbed clause \"Danny Ainge added 21 points\" becomes controlled by the new embedding clause \"Danny Ainge came off the bench\" to avoid the verbose form: ? \"Danny Ainge came off the bench for Danny Ainge to add 21 points\".",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 369,
"end": 375,
"text": "Fig. 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acquiring revision rules from corpus data",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "Evaluation methodology",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In the spectrum of possible evaluations, the evaluation presented in this paper is characterized as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Its object is the revision rule hierarchy acquired from the sports summary corpus. It thus does not directly evaluate the output of STREAK, but rather the special knowledge structures required by its underlying revision-based model. s i.e., the source pattern expresses the same concept combination than the target pattern minus one concept.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The particular property of this revision rule hierarchy that is evaluated is cross-domain portability: how much of it could be re-used to generate summaries in another domain, namely the stock market?",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The basis for this evaluation is corpus data 9. The original sports summary corpus from which the revision rules were acquired is used as the 'training' (or acquisition) corpus and a corpus of stock market reports taken from several newswires is used as the 'test' corpus. This test corpus comprises over 18,000 sentences.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The evaluation procedure is quantitative, measuring percentages of revision rules whose target and source realization patterns are observable in the test corpus. It is also semi-automated through the use of the corpus search tool CREP (Duford, 1993 ) (as explained below).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 235,
"end": 248,
"text": "(Duford, 1993",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Basic principle As explained in section 3, a revision rule is associated with a list of surface decrement pairs, each one consisting of:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "A source pattern whose content and linguistic form match the triggering conditions of the rule (e.g., R~ in Fig. 3 for the rule Adjunctization of Range into Instrument).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 108,
"end": 114,
"text": "Fig. 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "A target pattern whose content and linguistic form can be derived from the source pattern by applying the rule (e.g., R 2 in Fig. 3 for the rule Adjunctization of Range into Instrument).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 125,
"end": 131,
"text": "Fig. 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This list of decrement pairs can thus be used as the signature of the revision rule to detect its usage in the test corpus. The needed evidence is the simultaneous presence of two test corpus sentences 1\u00b0 , each one respectively matching the source and target patterns of at least one element in this list. Requiring occurrence of the source pattern in the test corpus is necessary for the computation of conservative portability estimates: while it may seem that one target pattern alone is enough evidence, without the presence of the corresponding source pattern, one cannot rule out the possibility that, in the test domain, this target pattern is either a basic pattern or derived from another source pattern using another revision rule.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "9Only the corpus analysis was performed for both domains. The implementation was not actually ported to the stock market domain.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "1\u00b0In general, not from the same report.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Realization pattern R~:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Expresses the concept pair: <game-result(winner,loser,score), streak(winner,aspect,result-type,lengt h) >.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Partially automating the evaluation The software tool CREP 11 was developed to partially automate detection of realization patterns in a text corpus. The basic idea behind CREP is to approximate a realization pattern by a regular expression whose terminals are words or parts-of-speech tags (POStags). CR~.P will then automatically retrieve the corpus sentences matching those expressions. For example, the CREP expression C~1 below approximates the realization pattern R~ shown in Fig. 3 :",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 484,
"end": 490,
"text": "Fig. 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(61) TEAM Of (claimed[recorded)@VBD I-SCORE O= (victory[triumph)@NN O= (over[against)@IN O= TEAM",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In the expression above, 'VBD', 'NN' and 'IN' are the POS-tags for past verb, singular noun and preposition (respectively), and the sub-expressions 'TEAH' and 'SCORE' (whose recursive definitions are not shown here) match the team names and possible final scores (respectively) in the NBA. The CREP operators 'N=' and 'N-' (N being an arbitrary integer) respectively specify exact and minimal distance of N words, and 'l' encodes disjunction.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "llcREP was implemented (on top of FLEX, GNUS' version of LEX) and to a large extent also designed by Duford. It uses Ken Church's POS tagger.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Because a realization pattern abstracts away from lexical items to capture the mapping from concepts to syntactic structure, approximating such a pattern by a regular expression of words and POS-tags involves encoding each concept of the pattern by the disjunction of its alternative lexicalizations. In a given domain, there are therefore two sources of inaccuracy for such an approximation:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Lexical ambiguity resulting in false positives by over-generalization.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Incomplete vocabulary resulting in false negatives by over-specialization 12.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Lexical ambiguities can be alleviated by writing more context-sensitive expressions. The vocabulary can be acquired through additional exploratory CREP runs with expressions containing wild-cards for some concept slots. Although automated corpus search using CREP expressions considerably speedsup corpus analysis, manual intervention remains 12This is the case for example of C1 above, which is a simplification of the actual expression that was used to search occurrences of R~ in the test corpus (e.g., Cz is missing \"win\" and \"rout\" as alternatives for \"victory\"). necessary to filter out incorrect matches resulting from imperfect approximations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Cross-domain discrepancies Basic similarities between the finance and sports domains form the basis for the portability of the revision rules. In both domains, the core facts reported are statistics compiled within a standard temporal unit (in sports, one ballgame; in finance, one stock market session) together with streaks 13 and records compiled across several such units. This correspondence is, however, imperfect. Consequently, before they can track down usage of a revision rule in the test domain, the CREP expressions approximating the signature of the rule in the acquisition domain must be adjusted for cross-domain discrepancies to prevent false negatives. Two major types of adjustments are necessary: lexical and thematic.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Lexical adjustments handle cases of partial mismatch between the respective vocabularies used to lexicalize matching conceptual structures in each domain. (e.g.,, the verb \"to rebound from\" expresses the interruption of a streak in the stock market domain, while in the basketball domain \"to break\" or \"to snap\" are preferred since \"to rebound\" is used to express a different concept).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Thematic adjustments handle cases of partial differences between corresponding conceptual structures in the acquisition and test domains. For example, while in sports garae-result involves antagonistic teams, its financial domain counterpart session-result concerns only a single indicator. Consequently, the sub-expression for the loser role in the example CI:tEP expression (~1 shown before, and which approximates realization pattern /~ for game-resull; (shown in Fig. 3 ), needs to become optional in order to also approximate patterns for session-resul~. This is done using the CREP operator ? as shown below: (C1/): TEAM O= (claimedlrecorded)@VBD 1-SCORE O= (victoryltriumph) @NN O= ( (over] against)@IN 0= TEAM) ?",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 467,
"end": 473,
"text": "Fig. 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Note that it is the CREP expressions used to automatically retrieve test corpus sentence pairs attesting usage of a revision rule that require this type of adjustment and not the revision rule itself 14. For example, the Adjoin of Frequency PP to Clause revision rule attaches a streak to a session-result clause without loser role in exactly the same way than it attaches a streak to a game-result with 13i.e., series of events with similar outcome. 14Some revision rules do require adjustment, but of another type (cfl Sect. 5).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "loser role. This is illustrated by the two corpus sentences below: P~: \"The Chicago Bulls beat the Phoenix Suns 99 91 for their 3rd straight win\" pt: \"The Amex Market Value Index inched up 0.16 to 481.94 for its sixth straight advance\" Detailed evaluation procedure The overall procedure to test portability of a revision rule consists of considering the surface decrement pairs in the rule signature in order, and repeating the following steps:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "1. Write a CREP expression for the acquisition target pattern.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "2. Iteratively delete, replace or generalize subexpressions in the CREP expression -to gloss over thematic and lexical discrepancies between the acquisition and test domains, and prevent false negatives -until it matches some test corpus sentence(s).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "3. Post-edit the file containing these matched sentences. If it contains only false positives of the sought target pattern, go back to step 2. Otherwise, proceed to step 4.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "4. Repeat step (1-3) with the source pattern of the pair under consideration. If a valid match can also be found for this source pattern, stop: the revision rule is portable. Otherwise, start over from step 1 with the next surface decrement pair in the revision rule signature. If there is no next pair left, stop: the revision rule is considered non-portable.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Steps (2,3) constitute a general, generate-and-test procedure to detect realization patterns usage in a corpus 15. Changing one CKEP sub-expression may result in going from too specific an expression with no valid match to either: (1) a well-adjusted expression with a valid match, (2) still too specific an expression with no valid match, or (3) already too general an expression with too many matches to be manually post-edited.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "It is in fact always possible to write more contextsensitive expressions, to manually edit larger nomatch files, or even to consider larger test corpora in the hope of finding a match. At some point however, one has to estimate, guided by the results of previous runs, that the likelihood of finding a match is too 15And since most generators rely on knowledge structures equivalent to realization patterns, this procedure can probably be adapted to semi-automatically evaluate the portability of virtually any corpus-based generator. small to justify the cost of further attempts. This is why the last line in the algorithm reads \"considered non-portable\" as opposed to \"non-portable\". The algorithm guarantees the validity of positive (i.e., portable) results only. Therefore, the figures presented in the next section constitute in fact a lowerbound estimate of the actual revision rule portability.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "4",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Evaluation results",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The results of the evaluation are summarized in Fig. 4-10 . They show the revision rule hierarchy, with portable classes highlighted in bold. The frequency of occurrence of each rule in the acquisition corpus is given below the leaves of the hierarchy. Some rules are same-concept portable: they are used to attach corresponding concepts in each domain (e.g., Adjoin of Frequency PP to Clause, as explained in Sect. 4). They could be re-used \"as is\" in the financial domain. Other rules, however, are only different-concept portable: they are used to attach altogether different concepts in each domain. This is the case for example of Adjoin Finite Time Clause to Clause, as illustrated by the two corpus sentences below, where the added temporal adjunct (in bold) conveys a streak in the sports sentence, but a complementary statistics in the financial one: T~: \"to lead Utah to a 119-89 trouncing of Denver as the Jazz defeated the Nuggets for the 12th straight time at home.\" T~: \"Volume amounted to a solid 349 million shares as advances out-paced declines 299 to 218.\".",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 48,
"end": 57,
"text": "Fig. 4-10",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "For different-concept portable rules, the left-hand side field specifying the concepts incorporable to the draft using this rule will need to be changed when porting the rule to the stock market domain. In Fig. 4 -10, the arcs leading same-concept portable classes are full and thick, those leading to differentconcept portable classes are dotted, and those leading to a non-portable classes are full but thin.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 206,
"end": 212,
"text": "Fig. 4",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "59% of all revision rule classes turned out to be same-concept portable, with another 7% differentconcept portable. Remarkably, all eight top-level classes identified in the sports domain had instances same-concept portable to the financial domain, even those involving the most complex non-monotonic revisions, or those with only a few instances in the sports corpus. Among the bottom-level classes that distinguish between revision rule applications in very specific semantic and syntactic contexts, 42% are same-concept portable with another 10% differentconcept portable. Finally, the correlation between high usage frequency in the acquisition corpus and portability to the test corpus is not statistically significant (i.e., the hypothesis that the more common a rule, the more likely it is to be portable could not be confirmed on the analyzed sample). See (Robin, 1994b) for further details on the evMuation results.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 864,
"end": 878,
"text": "(Robin, 1994b)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "There are two main stumbling blocks to portability: thematic role mismatch and side revisions. Thematic role mismatches are cases where the semantic label or syntactic sub-category of a constituent added or displaced by the rule differ in each domain (e.g., Adjunctization of Created into Instrument vs. Adjoin of Affected into Instrument). They push portability from 92% down to 71%. Their effect could be reduced by allowing STREAK'S reviser to manipulate the draft down to the surface syntactic role level (e.g., in both corpora Created and Affected surface as object). Currently, the reviser stops at the thematic role level to allow STREAK to take full advantage of the syntactic processing front-end SURGE (Elhadad and Robin, 1996) , which accepts such thematic structures as input.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 712,
"end": 737,
"text": "(Elhadad and Robin, 1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Accompanying side revisions push portability from 71% to 52%. This suggests that the design of STREAK could be improved by keeping side revisions separate from re-structuring revisions and interleaving the applications of the two. Currently, they are integrated together at the bottom of the revision rule hierarchy.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Related work",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Apart from STREAK, only three generation projects feature an empirical and quantitative evaluation: ANA (Kukich, 1983) , KNIGHT (Lester, 1993) and IM-AGENE (Van der Linden, 1993) . ANA generates short, newswire style summaries of the daily fluctuations of several stock market indexes from half-hourly updates of their values. For evaluation, Kukich measures both the conceptual and linguistic (lexical and syntactic) coverages of ANA by comparing the number of concepts and realization patterns identified during a corpus analysis with those actually implemented in the system.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 104,
"end": 118,
"text": "(Kukich, 1983)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 128,
"end": 142,
"text": "(Lester, 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 156,
"end": 178,
"text": "(Van der Linden, 1993)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "KNIGHT generates natural language concept definitions from a large biological knowledge base, relying on SURGE for syntactic realization. For evaluation, Lester performs a Turing test in which a panel of human judges rates 120 sample definitions by assigning grades (from A to F) for:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Semantic accuracy (defined as \"Is the definition adequate, providing correct information and focusing on what's important?\" in the instructions provided to the judges).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Stylistic accuracy (defined as \"Does the definition use good prose and is the information it The judges did not know that half the definitions were computer-generated while the other half were written by four human domain experts. Impressively, the results show that:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "\u2022 With respect to semantic accuracy, the human judges could not tell KNIGHT apart from the human writers. * While as a group, humans got statistically significantly better grades for stylistic accuracy than KNIGHT, the best human writer was singlehandly responsible for this difference.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "IMAGENE generates instructions on how to operate household devices relying on NIGEL (Mann and Matthiessen, 1983) for syntactic realization. The implementation focuses on a very limited aspect of text generation: the realization of purpose relations. Taking as input the description of a pair <operation, purpose of the operation>, augmented by a set of features simulating the communicative context of generation, IMAGENE selects, among the many realizations of purpose generable by NIGEL (e.g., fronted to-infinitive clause vs. trailing for-gerund clauses), the one that is most appropriate for the simulated context (e.g., in the context of several operations sharing the same purpose, the latter is preferentially expressed before those actions than after them). IM-AGENE's contextual preference rules were abstracted by analyzing an acquisition corpus of about 300 purpose clauses from cordless telephone manuMs. For evaluation, Van der Linden compares the purpose realizations picked by IMAGENE to the one in the corresponding corpus text, first on the acquisition corpus and then on a test corpus of about 300 other purpose clauses from manuals for other devices than cordless telephones (ranging from clock radio to automobile). The results show a 71% match on the acquisition corpus 16 and a 52% match on the test corpus.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 84,
"end": 112,
"text": "(Mann and Matthiessen, 1983)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The table of Fig. 11 summarizes the difference on both goal and methodology between the evaluations carried out in the projects ANA, KNIGHT, IMAGENE and STREAK. In terms of goals, while Kukich and Lester evaluate the coverage or accuracy of a particular implementation, I instead focus on three properties inherent to the use of the revision-based generation model underlying STREAK: robustness (how much of other text samples from the same domain can be generated without acquiring new knowledge?) and scalability (how much more new knowledge is needed to fully cover these other samples?) discussed in (Robin and McKeown, 1995) , and portability to another domain in the present paper. Van der Linden does a little bit of both by first measuring the stylistic accuracy of his system for a very restricted sub-domain, and then measuring how it degrades for a more general domain.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 604,
"end": 629,
"text": "(Robin and McKeown, 1995)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 13,
"end": 20,
"text": "Fig. 11",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In itself, measuring the accuracy and coverage of a particular implementation in the sub-domain for which it was designed brings little insights about what generation approach should be adopted in future work. Indeed, even a system using mere canned text can be very accurate and attain substantial coverage if enough hand-coding effort is put into it. However, all this effort will have to be entirely duplicated each time the system is scaled up or ported to a new domain. Measuring how much of this effort duplication can be avoided when relying on revisionbased generation was the very object of the three evaluations carried in the STREAK project.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "16This imperfect match on the acquisition corpus seems to result from the heuristic nature of IMAGENE's stylistic preferences: individually, none of them needs to apply to the whole corpus.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In terms of methodology, the main originality of these three evaluations is the use of CREP to partially automate reverse engineering of corpus sentences. Beyond evaluation, CREP is a simple, but general and very handy tool that should prove useful to speed-up a wide range of corpora analyses.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "6",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In this paper, I presented a quantitative evaluation of the portability to the stock market domain of the revision rule hierarchy used by the system STREAK to incrementally generate newswire sports summaries. The evaluation procedure consists of searching a test corpus of stock market reports for sentence pairs whose (semantic and syntactic) structures respectively match the triggering condition and application result of each revision rule. The results show that at least 59% of all rule classes are fully portable, with at least another 7% partially portable.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "Since the sports domain is not closer to the financial domain than to other quantitative domains such as meteorology, demography, business auditing or computer surveillance, these results are very encouraging with respect to the general cross-domain reusability potential of the knowledge structures used in revision-based generation. However, the present evaluation concerned only one type of such knowledge structures: revision rules. In future work, similar evaluations will be needed for the other types of knowledge structures: content selection rules, phrase planning rules and lexicalization rules.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7"
}
],
"back_matter": [],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "caEP: a regular expressionmatching textual corpus tool",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Duford",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Duford, D. 1993. caEP: a regular expression- matching textual corpus tool. Technical Report CU-CS-005-93. Computer Science Department, Columbia University, New York.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "An overview of SURGE: a re-usable comprehensive syntactic realization component",
"authors": [
{
"first": "M",
"middle": [],
"last": "Elhadad",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1996,
"venue": "Computer Science and Mathematics Department",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Elhadad, M. and Robin, J. 1996. An overview of SURGE: a re-usable comprehensive syntactic realization component. Technical Report 96-03. Computer Science and Mathematics Department, Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Knowledge-based report generation: a knowledge engineering approach to natural language report generation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kukich",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1983,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kukich, K. 1983. Knowledge-based report genera- tion: a knowledge engineering approach to natural language report generation. PhD. Thesis. Depart- ment of Information Science. University of Pitts- burgh.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Generating natural language explanations from large-scale knowledge bases",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Lester",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Lester, J.C. 1993. Generating natural language explanations from large-scale knowledge bases. PhD. Thesis. Computer Science Department, University of Texas at Austin.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "NIGEL: a systemic grammar for text generation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Mann",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Matthiessen",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1983,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Mann, W.C. and Matthiessen, C. M. 1983. NIGEL: a systemic grammar for text generation. Research Report RR-83-105. ISI. Marina Del Rey, CA.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Corpus analysis for revision-based generation of complex sentences",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Mckeown",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 11th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Washington DC. (AAAI'93)",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robin, J. and McKeown, K.R. 1993. Corpus anal- ysis for revision-based generation of complex sen- tences. In Proceedings of the 11th National Con- ference on Artificial Intelligence, Washington DC. (AAAI'93).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Empirically designing and evaluating a new revision-based model for summary generation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robin",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [
"R"
],
"last": "Mckeown",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1995,
"venue": "Special Issue on Empirical Methods",
"volume": "85",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robin, J. and McKeown, K.R. 1995. Empirically designing and evaluating a new revision-based model for summary generation. Artificial Intel- ligence. Vol 85. Special Issue on Empirical Meth- ods. North-Holland.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "A revision-based generation architecture for reporting facts in their historical context",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "New Concepts in Natural Language Generation: Planning, Realization and System. Horacek, H. and Zock",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robin, J. 1993. A revision-based generation archi- tecture for reporting facts in their historical con- text. In New Concepts in Natural Language Gen- eration: Planning, Realization and System. Ho- racek, H. and Zock, M., Eds. Frances Pinter.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Automatic generation and revision of natural language summaries providing historical background",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1994,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 11th Brazilian Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Fortaleza",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robin, J. 1994a. Automatic generation and revision of natural language summaries providing histori- cal background In Proceedings of the 11th Brazil- ian Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Fort- aleza, Brazil. (SBIA'94).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Revision-based generation of natural language summaries providing historical background: corpus-based analysis, design, implementation and evaluation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1994,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robin, J. 1994b. Revision-based generation of natu- ral language summaries providing historical back- ground: corpus-based analysis, design, implemen- tation and evaluation. PhD. Thesis. Available as Technical Report CU-CS-034-94. Computer Science Department, Columbia University, New York.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Expressing rhetorical relations in instructional texts: a case study of the purpose relation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [],
"last": "Van Der Linden",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Martin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1995,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "21",
"issue": "1",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Van der Linden, K. and Martin, J.H. 1995. Ex- pressing rhetorical relations in instructional texts: a case study of the purpose relation. Computa- tional Linguistics, 21(1). MIT Press.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Complex sentence generation through incremental revisions in STREAK"
},
"FIGREF1": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Paragraph of simple sentences paraphrasing a single complex sentence sentence reaches linguistic complexity limits empir-icMly observed in the corpus (e.g., 50 word long or parse tree of depth 10)."
},
"FIGREF2": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Realization pattern examples"
},
"FIGREF3": {
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"text": "rument as-affected-apposition as-mean as-co-event Demotion and Promotion revision rule sub-hierarchy Adjoin Empirical evaluations in language generation conveys well organized\" in the instructions provided to the judges)."
},
"TABREF0": {
"text": "1. Initial draft (basic sentence pattern):\"Dallas, TX -Charles Barkley scored 42 points Sunday as the Phoenix Suns defeated the Dallas Mavericks 123-97.\"",
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td>2. Adjunctization of Created into Instrument:</td></tr><tr><td>\"Dallas, TX -Charles Barkley tied a season high wlth 42 points Sunday as the Phoenix Suns defeated the</td></tr><tr><td>Dallas Mavericks 123-97.\"</td></tr><tr><td>3. Coordinative Conjoin of Clause:</td></tr><tr><td>\"Dallas, TX -Charles Barkley tied a season high with 42 points and Danny A|nge added 21 Sunday as the</td></tr><tr><td>Phoenix Suns defeated the Dallas Mavericks 123-97.\"</td></tr><tr><td>-97.\"</td></tr><tr><td>5. l~ominalization with 0rdinal Adjoin:</td></tr><tr><td>\"Dallas, TX -Charles Barldey tied a season high with 42 points and Danny Ainge came off the bench to add</td></tr><tr><td>21 Sunday as the Phoenix Suns handed the Dallas Mavericks their 13th straight home defeat 123-97.\"</td></tr></table>",
"html": null,
"num": null
},
"TABREF1": {
"text": "Is a target pattern of the revision rule Adjunctization of Range into Instrument.",
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td>winner</td><td>aspect</td><td colspan=\"2\">l type</td><td colspan=\"2\">l streak</td><td>length</td><td>[</td><td/><td>[ score ]game-result [</td><td>loser</td></tr><tr><td>agent</td><td>action</td><td colspan=\"3\">affected/located</td><td/><td>location</td><td/><td/><td>instrument</td></tr><tr><td>proper</td><td>verb</td><td/><td>NP</td><td/><td/><td>PP</td><td/><td/><td>PP</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td colspan=\"3\">det] classifier I noun</td><td/><td/><td>prep ]</td><td/><td>NP</td></tr><tr><td>Utah</td><td>extended</td><td>its</td><td>win</td><td>streak</td><td/><td>to 6 games</td><td>with</td><td>a</td><td>L_J numbe~J 99-84 triumph -over enl3-d-~V-~ PP</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">Boston stretching</td><td colspan=\"2\">its winning</td><td>spree</td><td/><td colspan=\"2\">to 9 outings with</td><td>a</td><td>118-94</td><td>rout</td><td>of Utah</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"3\">Realization pattern R~:</td><td/><td/><td/><td/><td/><td/></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>winner</td><td/><td/><td/><td colspan=\"3\">I score ] game-result I</td><td>loser</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>agent</td><td colspan=\"2\">action</td><td/><td/><td>range</td><td/></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>proper</td><td colspan=\"2\">support-verb</td><td/><td/><td>NP</td><td/></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>Chicago</td><td colspan=\"2\">claimed</td><td colspan=\"2\">det I number I a</td><td>noun Y</td><td>I</td><td>PP over New Jersey</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>Orlando</td><td colspan=\"2\">recorded</td><td>a</td><td>101-95</td><td>triumph</td><td/><td>against New York</td></tr></table>",
"html": null,
"num": null
}
}
}
} |