| { |
| "paper_id": "E85-1007", |
| "header": { |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T11:30:31.466247Z" |
| }, |
| "title": "SAUMER: SENTENCE ANALYSIS USING METARULES", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Fred", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Popowich", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": { |
| "laboratory": "Natural Language Group Laboratory for Computer and Communications Research", |
| "institution": "Simon Fraser University Burnaby. B.C", |
| "location": { |
| "postCode": "V5A 1S6", |
| "country": "CANADA" |
| } |
| }, |
| "email": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": "", |
| "venue": null, |
| "identifiers": {}, |
| "abstract": "The SAUMER system uses specifications of natural language grammars, which consist of rules and metarules. to provide a semantic interpretation of an input sentence. The SAUMER ' Specification Language (SSL) is a programming language which combin~ some of the features of generalised phrase structure grammars (Gazdar. 1981). like the correspondence between syntactic and semantic rules, with definite clause grammars (DCC-s) (Pereira and Warren. 1980) to create an executable grammar specification. SSL rules are similar to DCG rules except that they contain a semantic component and may also be left recursive. Metarules are used to generate new rules trom existing rules before any parsing is attempted. A.n implementation is tested which can provide semantic interpretations for sentences containing tepicalisation, relative clauses, passivisation, and questions. 111 should also be noted that. due Io the separabili'~y of the semantic component from \",he grammar rule, \u2022 different semantic notation could easily be introduced at long as ~u~ app~priate ~.mantic proce~in8 rou~dne$ were replaced. The use of SAUMER with \"an \"Al-adap'md\" version of Mon~ue's Intensional Logic\" is being examined by Fawc\u00a9It (1984),", |
| "pdf_parse": { |
| "paper_id": "E85-1007", |
| "_pdf_hash": "", |
| "abstract": [ |
| { |
| "text": "The SAUMER system uses specifications of natural language grammars, which consist of rules and metarules. to provide a semantic interpretation of an input sentence. The SAUMER ' Specification Language (SSL) is a programming language which combin~ some of the features of generalised phrase structure grammars (Gazdar. 1981). like the correspondence between syntactic and semantic rules, with definite clause grammars (DCC-s) (Pereira and Warren. 1980) to create an executable grammar specification. SSL rules are similar to DCG rules except that they contain a semantic component and may also be left recursive. Metarules are used to generate new rules trom existing rules before any parsing is attempted. A.n implementation is tested which can provide semantic interpretations for sentences containing tepicalisation, relative clauses, passivisation, and questions. 111 should also be noted that. due Io the separabili'~y of the semantic component from \",he grammar rule, \u2022 different semantic notation could easily be introduced at long as ~u~ app~priate ~.mantic proce~in8 rou~dne$ were replaced. The use of SAUMER with \"an \"Al-adap'md\" version of Mon~ue's Intensional Logic\" is being examined by Fawc\u00a9It (1984),", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Abstract", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "body_text": [ |
| { |
| "text": "The SAUMER system allows the user to specify a grammar for a natural language using rules and metarules rhts grammar can then be u\u00a2,ed ~ obtain a semantic interpretation of an input sentence.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "INTRODUCTION", |
| "sec_num": "1." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The SAUMER Specification language (SSL) . which L~ a variation of definite clause gr~s (DCGs) (Pereira and Warren. 1980) . captures some ,ff the festures of generaI\u00a3.ted phrase structure grammar5 (GPSGs) (Gazdax, 1981) (GaTrl~r and Pullum. 1982) . like rule schemata, rule transformations. structured categories, slash categories, and the correspondence between syntactic and semantic rules. The semantics currently used in the system are based on Schubert and Pelletiers description in (Schubert and Pelletier. 1982 ). -which adapts the intetmional logic intervretation associated with GPSGs. into a more conventional logical notation", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 34, |
| "end": 39, |
| "text": "(SSL)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 94, |
| "end": 120, |
| "text": "(Pereira and Warren. 1980)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 204, |
| "end": 218, |
| "text": "(Gazdax, 1981)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 219, |
| "end": 245, |
| "text": "(GaTrl~r and Pullum. 1982)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 487, |
| "end": 516, |
| "text": "(Schubert and Pelletier. 1982", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "INTRODUCTION", |
| "sec_num": "1." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The logical notation associated with the gr~mm~r differs from. the usual notation of intensional logic_since it captures some intmtive aspects of natural language, l Thus. individuals and objects are treated as entities. instead of collections of prope'rties, and actions are n-ary relations between these entities.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Many of the problems that the intensional notation would solve are handled by allowing ambiguity to be represented in the logical notation. Consequently. as is common in other approaches. (e.g.. Gawron. 1982) . much of the processing is deferred to the pragmatic stage. The structure of the lexicon, and the appearance of post processing markers (sharp angle brackets) are designed to reflect this ambiguity.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 195, |
| "end": 208, |
| "text": "Gawron. 1982)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The lexicon is organised into two levels.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For the semantic interpretation, the first level gives each word a tentative interpretation.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "During the pragmatic analysis, more complete processing information will result in the final interpretation being obtained from the second level of the lexicon. For e~mple, the sentence John misses John could be given an initial interpretation of:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.1) [ Johnl misa2 John3 ]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "with Johnl, miss2 and John3 obtained from the first level of the two level lexicon.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The pragmatic stage will determine if Johal and John3 both refer to the same entry, say JOHN SMITH1. of the second level of the lexicon, or if they correspond to different entries, say JOHN_JONES1 and JOHN_EVANS1. During the pragmatic stage, the entry of MISS which is referred to by miss2 will be determined (if possible).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For example, does John miss John because he has been away for a long time, or is it because he is a poor shot with a rifle?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Any interpretation contained in sharp angle brackets. <...>. may require post processing. This is apparent in interpretations containing determiners and co-ordinators.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The proverb:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.2)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "every man loves some woman could be given the interpretation:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.3) [<everyl man2> love3 <some4 womanS>]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "without explicitly stating whmh of the two readings is intended. During pragmatic analysis, the scope of every and some would presumably be determined.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The syntax of this logical notation can be b-~mmav~sed as follows.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Sentences and compound predicate formulas are contained within square brackets. So. (2.4) states that 3oim wants to kiss Mary:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.4) [Johnl want2 [John1 kiss3 Mary4]]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "These formulas can also be expressed equivalently in a more functional form according to the equivalence", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.5) [ t n P t I . . . tad ] ---( \u2022 . . ((P t l) t 2) . . . t n ) --( P t t . t. )", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Consequently. (2.4) could also be represented as:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.6) ((want2 ((kiss3 Mary4) Johnl)} Johnl)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "However. this notation is usually used for incomplete phrases, with the square brackets used to obtain a cortvent/ona/ final reading Modified predicate formulas are contained in braces. Thus. a little dog likes Fido could be expressed as:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.7)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "[<al {little2 dog3}> likes4 FidoS]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The lambda calculus operations of lambda abstraction and elimination are also allowed. When a variable is abstracted from an expression as in:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.8) kx [ \u2022 want2 [ \u2022 love3 Mary4 ] ]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "application of this new expression to an argument, say dohnl:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.9) ( kx [ \u2022 want2 [ \u2022 love3 l~u~J'4 ] ] Johnl )", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "will result in an int~,v,\u00a9tation of John wants to love Mary:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2.10) [ Johnl want2 [ Johnl love3 Mary4 ] ]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Further details on this notation are available in (Schubert and Pelletier. 1982) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 50, |
| "end": 80, |
| "text": "(Schubert and Pelletier. 1982)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SEMANTIC LOGICAL NOTATION", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The SAUMER Specification Language (SSL) is a programming language that allows the user to define a grammar of a natural language \"in ~ of rules, and metarules.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SAUMER SPECIFICATION LANGUAGE", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Metarules operate on rules to produce new rules.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SAUMER SPECIFICATION LANGUAGE", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The language is basically a GPSG realised in a DCG setting.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SAUMER SPECIFICATION LANGUAGE", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Unlike GPSGs. the grammars defined by this system are not required to be context-free since procedure calls are allowed within the rules, and since logic variables are allowed in the grammar symbols.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SAUMER SPECIFICATION LANGUAGE", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The basic objects of the language are atoms, variables. terms, and lists.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SAUMER SPECIFICATION LANGUAGE", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Any word starting with a lower case letter, or enclosed in single quotes is an atom.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SAUMER SPECIFICATION LANGUAGE", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Variables start with a capital letter or an underscore. A term is an atom. optionally followed by a series of objects (arguments), which are enclosed in parentheses and separated by commas.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SAUMER SPECIFICATION LANGUAGE", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Lastly. a list is a series of one or more objects, separated by commas, that are enclosed in square brackets", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "THE SAUMER SPECIFICATION LANGUAGE", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The rules are presented in a variation of the DCG notation, augmented with a semantic rule corresponding to each syntactic rule.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Each rule is of the form \"A --> B : ~,\" where A is a term which denotes a nonterminal symbol. B is either an atom list representing a terminal symbol or a conjunction of terms (separated by commas) corresponding to nonterminal symbols, and y is a semantic rule which may reference the interpretation of the components of ~ in determining the semantics of A. The rule arrow. -->. separates the two sides of the rule. with the colon. :. separating the syntactic component from the semantic component.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "If the rule is preceded by the word add, it can be subjected to the transformations described in section 3.2.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The nonterminal symbols can possess arguments, which may be used to capture the flavour of the struaurad categor/~s of GPSGs. ~ may also possess arbitrary procedural restrictions contained in braces.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "T consists of expressions in the semantic notation. The different terms of this semantic expression are joined by the semantic connector, the ampersand \"&'.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The ampersand differ, from the syntactic connector, the comma, sinc~ the former associates to the right while the latter associates to the left.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The /og/col and symbol. which traditionally may also be denoted by the ampersand, must be entered as \"&&'.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Due to constraints imposed by the current implementation, \"( exFr )\" must be entered as \"<[ expr ]'. \"< expr >\" as \"< <[ expr ]'. and \"k x expr\" as \"x lmda expr.\"", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "An expression may contain references to the interpretations of the elements of 18 by stating the appropriate nonterminal followed by the left quote, \".", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To prevent ambiguity in \"these references that may arise when two identical symbols appear in B. a nonterminal may be appended with a minus sign followed by a unique integer.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Unlike standard Prolog implementations of DCGs. left recursion is allowed in rules, thus permitting more natural descriptions of certain phenomena (like co-ordination). Since the left recursive rules are interpreted, rather than converted into rules that are not left recursive, the number of rules in the database will not be affected. However. the efficiency of the sentence analysis may be affected due to the extra processing required.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Rules of the form \"A --> A. A\" are not accepted.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "An example of a production that derives John from a proper noun. npr. is shown in (3.1):", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3.1) npr --> ['John'] : \"John'#", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The semantic interpretation of this npr will be John#. with \"#\" replaced by a unique integer during evaluation. (3.2) illustrates a verb phrase rule that could be used in sentences like John wants to wa/k:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3.2) vp(Num) --> v(Num.Root) with Root in [want.like]. vp(inf) x## lmda [ x## & v\" & [x## & vp']) ]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "First nottce that a restriction on the verb appears within the w/th statement. In the GPSG formalism, this type of restriction would be obtained by naming the rules and associating a list of valid rule names with each lexical entry.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Although the w/~h restriction may contain any valid in-ocedure, typically the in operation (for determining list membership) is used.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The double pound. ##. is replaced by the same unique integer in the entire expression when the expression is evaluated.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "If \"#\" were used instead, each instance of x# would be different. For the above example, if v' is want2 and vp' is runJ. then the semantic expression could evaluate to:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3.3) x4 lmda [x4 & want2 & [x4 & run3]]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Furthermore. if np\" is Johrtl. then:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3.4) [np\" & vp']", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "could result in:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3.5) [Johnl & want2 & [Johnl & run3]]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rules", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Traditional transformational grammars provide transformations that operate on parse trees, or similar structures, and often require the transformations to be used in sentence recognition rather than in generation (Radford. 1981).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "However. the approach suggested by (GaT~2r. 1981) uses the transformations generatively and applies them to the grammar.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Thus. the grammar can remain contex:-free by compiling this transformational knowledge into the grammar.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Transformations and rule schemata form the maazu/~s of SSI-2 Rule schemata allow the user to specify entire classes of rules by permitting variables which range over a selection of categories to appear in the rule.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To control the values of the variables, the fora// control structure can be used in the schema declaration.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The schema fora// X ~n List, Body will execute Body for each element of Li~. with X instantiated to the current element. The use of this statement is illustrated in the following metarule that generates the terminal productions for proper", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "nouns.\" (3.6) forall Terminal in ['Bob'.'Carol'.'red'.'Alice'], (npr --> [Terminal] : Terminal#) .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Transformations match with grammar rules in the database, using a rule pattern that may be augmented with arbitrary procedures, and produce new rules from the old rules. A transformation is of the form:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3.7) a --> /i : y ---> a' --> B\" : 7\"", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The metarule arrow.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "-->, separates the pattern, a --> ~ : T. from the template, a\" --> /i\" : T'-2Oflen. metarule~ are considered 1o consisl of transformations only, while schemata are pul inlo a category of their own.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "However. sinoe they can both be considered i~ part of \u2022 metagramma~, they are called me~trule~ in thl, distna~inn.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The ~n~a~ pattern, Q --> /i. contains nonterminals. which correspond to symbols that must appear in the matched rule, and free variables, which represent don't ~r~regions of zero or more nonterminals. The pattern nontermmals may also possess arguments.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For each rule symbol, a matching pattern symbol describes properties that must exist, but not all the properties that may exist. Thus. if vp appeared in the pattern, it would match any of vp. vp(Num), or vp(Nura2\"ype) with Type in /transl. However. pp(to) would not match pp or pp(frora), but it would match plMto,_).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The matching conditions are summarised in Figures 3-1 and 3-2 . In Figure 3 -1. A and B are nonterminals. X is a free variable, and a and /i are conjunctions of one or more symbols, y and 8 of Figure 3 -2 are also conjunctions of one or more symbols. \"=\" is defined as unification (Clocksin and Mellish, 1981) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 282, |
| "end": 310, |
| "text": "(Clocksin and Mellish, 1981)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 42, |
| "end": 61, |
| "text": "Figures 3-1 and 3-2", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 67, |
| "end": 75, |
| "text": "Figure 3", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 193, |
| "end": 202, |
| "text": "Figure 3", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Parts of the rule contained in braces are ignored by the pattern matcher. The syntactic pattern may also contain arbitrary restrictions. 3 enclosed in braces, that are evaluated during the pattern match.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The semant/c pattern, y, is very primitive, h may contain a free variable, which will bind to the entire semantics field of the matched rule, or it may contain the structure <[? ~]. which will bind to the entire structure containing the symbol x.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "If <[? y] then appears in y', the result will be the semantic component of the matched rule with x replaced by y. The behaviour of patterns can be seen in the following examples. Consider the sentence rule:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Metarules", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3.8) s(decl) --> np(nom.Numb). vp(_Jqumb) with agreement(Numb) : [ rip\" & vp\" ]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The patterns shown in (3.9a) will match (3.8). while those of (3.9b) will not match it. the patterns of (3.11a) will result in a successful match. will those of (3.11b) will not:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "With external modification, any nonterminal, or variable instantiated to a nonterminal, may be followed by the sequence @rood.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "This will result in rood being inserted into the argument list following the specified arguments.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Thus, mf N@junk appeared in a rule when N was instantiated to np(more), it would be expanded as rip(more,junk }. Similarly, if the pattern symbol vp matched v,v{NumS) in a rule, then the appearance of vp@foo in the template would result in vp(foo~Vumb)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "appearing in the new rule. This extra argument. introduced by the modifier, can be useful when dealing with the missing components of slash or derived categories (Gazdar, 1981) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 162, |
| "end": 176, |
| "text": "(Gazdar, 1981)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Internal modification allows the modifier to be put directly into the argument list.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "If an argument is followed by @rood. it will be replaced by rood.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In the case where @rood appears as an argument by itself, rood is added as a new argument. For example, if v(Numb@pastpart) were contained in a template, it would IT-match v(Numb) in the pattern, and would result in the appearance of v(pastpart) in the new rule.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3.11) (a) vp-", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "> v : <[?v] vp --> v( .... Type._)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "with (X, intrans in Type. Y).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Z:Sem (b) vp --> v(..._.Type._) with (X. trans in Type) :Sem vp -> v(_~oot .... ) with (Root in [fool. X)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": ":Sem", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For every rule that matches the pattern, the template of the transformation is executed, resulting the creation of a new rule. Any nonterminal. N, that matches a symbol 8 i on the left side of the transformation, will appear in the new rule if there is a symbol ~i\" in 8\" that irura-transformation (IT) matches with ~i\" If there are several symbols in 8\" that IT-match ~i\" the leftmost symbol will be selected.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "No symbol on one side of the transformation may IT-match with more than one symbol on the other side.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Two symbols will IT-match only if they have the same number of arguments, and those arguments are identical.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Any w/th expressions and modifiers associated with symbols are ignored during ITmatching. 8\" may also contain extra symbols that do not correspond to anything in 8.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In this case. they are inserted directly into the new rule.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Once again, if the transformation is preceded by the command add. then the resulting rul~ can be subjected to subsequent transformations.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Both rules and metarules may contains modifiers that alter the ~tructure of the nonterminal symbols. There are two types of modification, which have been dubbed external and /nzerrud modification.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Modifiers", |
| "sec_num": "3.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The SAUMER system is currently implemented in highly portable C-Prolog (Pereira. 1984) . and runs on a Motorola 68000 based SUN Workstation supporting UNIX 4. Calls to Prolog are allowed by the system, thus providing useful tools for debugging grsmmars, and tracing derivations.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 71, |
| "end": 86, |
| "text": "(Pereira. 1984)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "IMPLEMENTATION", |
| "sec_num": "4." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "However. due to the highly declarative nature of SSL, it is not restricted to a Prolog ....... implementation. Implementations in other languages would differ externally only in the syntax of the procedure calls that may appear in each rule. Use of the system is described in detail in (Popowich, 1985) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 286, |
| "end": 302, |
| "text": "(Popowich, 1985)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "IMPLEMENTATION", |
| "sec_num": "4." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The current implementation converts the grammar as specified by the rules and metarules into Prolog clauses. This conversion can be examined in terms of how rules are processecl, and how the schemata and transformations are processed.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "IMPLEMENTATION", |
| "sec_num": "4." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The syntactic component of the rule processor is based on Clocksin and Mellish's definite clause grammar processor (Clocksin and Mellish. 1981) which has been implemented in C-Prolog.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 115, |
| "end": 143, |
| "text": "(Clocksin and Mellish. 1981)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For a DCG rule. each nonterminal is converted into a Prolog predicate, with two additional arguments, that can be processed by a top-down parser. These ~tn arguments correspond to the list to be parsed, and the remainder of the list after the predicate has parsed the desired category.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "With the addition of semantics to each rule, another argument is required to represent the semantic interpretation of the current symbol. Thus. whenever a left quoted category name. x'.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rule Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "appears in the semantics of the rule. it'is'repla~gl by a variable bound to the semantic argument of the corresponding symbol, x. in the rule.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The semantic expression is then evaluated by the eva/ routine with the result bound to the semantic argument of the nonterminal on the left hand side of the production. For ~ffiample. the sentence /ule: The first argument returns the interpretation, the second argument returns the type of sentence, the third is the initial input list. and the final argument corresponds to the list rPmaining after finding a sentence. Any rule R, that is preceded by add will have the axiom r'ul~(R) inserted into the database. These axioms are used by the transformations during pattern matching.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(4.1) add s(decl) ->", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The eva/ routine processes the suffix symbols, # and ## along wlth the lambda .expressions, and may perform some-reorganisation of the given expression--before returning a new semantic form.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For each expression of the form name#, a unique integer N is ca-eared and nan~-N is returned.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "With \"##'. the procedure is the same except that the first occurrence of \"##\" will generate a unique integer that will be saved for all subsequent occurrences. To evaluate an expression of the form:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(4.4) ( expr i Lmda e~Fj & X )", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "every subexpression of exprj is recursively searched for an occurrence of expr i. which is then replaced by X.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Left recursion is removed with the aid of a gap predicate identical to the one defined to process gapping gr-ammarS (Dahl and Abramson. 1984) and unre~Lricte~ gapping grammars (Popowich. forthcoming). For any rule of the form: According to (4.6). a phrase is processed by skipping over a region to find a B --the first non-terminal that does not equal A. The skipped region is then examined to ensure that it corresponds to an A before the rest of the phrase is processed.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 116, |
| "end": 141, |
| "text": "(Dahl and Abramson. 1984)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4UNIX is \u2022 Inulemark of Bell Laboralories", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To process the metarule control structures used by schemata, a fml predicate is inserted to force Prolog to try all possible alternatives.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Schema Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The simple recursive definition of /ore// X/~ /./rt: uses fa// to undo the binding of Y, the first element of the list. to X before calling fore// with the remainder of the list. The predicate \u00a2.<d/l is used to evaluate Body since it will prevent the fa// predicate from causing backtracking into Body.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Schema Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Execution of transformations requires the most complex processing of all of the metagrammatical operations.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "This processing can be divided into the three stages of transformation crY.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "pattern matching, and rule crem,/on. 5", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "During the rrar~fornuU/~n trot/on phase, the predicate rrarts(M,X,Y) is created for the metarule. M. This predicate will transform a list of elements. X: into another ILSL Y, according to the syntax specification of the metarule. Elements that IT-match will be represented by the same free variable in both lists. This binding will be one to one. since an element cannot match with more than one element on the other side. Symbols that appear on only one side will not have their free variable appearing on the opposite side. Expressions in braces are ignored during this stage. If a transformation like: will be created. Notice that the appearance of a modifier does not cause a@/oo to be distinguished from a. since all modifiers are removed before the pattern-template match is attempted. However. c and c(foo) are considered to be different symbols.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "M is a unique integer associated with the transformation.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The pattern match phase determines if a rule matches the pattern, and produces a list for each successful match which will be transformed by the trans predicate. Each element of the list is either one of the matched symbols from the rule. or a list of symbols corresponding to the don't care region of the pattern.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Any predicates that 5(Popowich, forthcoming) examines a method of transformalion ~ing that uses the transformations during ~3~e par~e, instead of Using them m L~me~te new ~.fle~. appear in braces in the pattern are evaluated during the pattern match. Consider the operation of an active-passive verb phrase transformation:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(4.10) vp(active~Numb) --> v(Numb.R.Type.SType) with (X.trans in Type.Y). np. Z < [? np'] v~pass.Numb) --> v(Numb.be.T.S)-I with auz in T. v(Numb@pastpart.R.Type.SType) with (X.trans in Type.Y).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 82, |
| "end": 89, |
| "text": "[? np']", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation Processing", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": ":", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "z. pp(by._)", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "x## Imda [pp(by)\" & <[7 x##]]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "z. pp(by._)", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "on the following verb phrase: []", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "z. pp(by._)", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Notice that there was nothing in the rule to bind with X. Y or Z. Consequently. these variables were assigned the null list. []. The pattern match of the semantics of the rule will result in an expression which lambda abswacts np\" out the of semantics:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "]", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(4.13) <[ np\" lmda <[ v\" & np\" ] ]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "]", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Finally. the ru/~ crea\u00a2/on phase applies the transformation to the list produced by the pattern match. and then uses the new list and the template to obtain a new rule. This phase includes conversion of the new list back into rule form. the application of modifiers, and the addition of any extra symbols that appear on the right hand side only. To continue with our *Tample. the trans predicate a.~ociated with (4.10) would be: [3. _51", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "]", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The rule generated by the rule creation phase would be:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "]", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(4.16) vp(pass~lumb) --> v(Numb.be.T~)-I with aux in T. v(pastpart.R,Type._) with tnns in Type. pp(by._) :", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "]", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "x## lmda [ pp(by)\" & <[ v\" & x## ] ]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "]", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022 Notice that the expression \"<[ v\" & x## ]'. which is \u2022 contained in the semantics of (4.16) was obtained by the application of (4.13) to x##.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "]", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To examine the usefulness of this type of grammar specification, as well as the adequacy of the implementation, a grammar was developed that uses the domain of the Automated Academic Advisor (AAA) (Cercone et.al.. 1984) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 197, |
| "end": 219, |
| "text": "(Cercone et.al.. 1984)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The AAA is an interactive information system under development at Simon Fraser University. It is intended to act as an aid in \"curriculum planning and management', that accepts natural language queries and generates the appropriate responses.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Routines for performing some morphological analysis, and for retrieving lexical information were also provided.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The SSL grammar allows questions to be posed. permits some possessive forms, and allows auxiliaries to appear in the sentences.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "From the base of twenty six rules, eighty additional rules were produced by three metarules in about eighty-five seconds.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Ten more rules were needed to link the lexicon and the grammar.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A selection of the rules and metarules appears in Figure 5 -1. The complete grammar and lexicon is provided in (Popowich. 1985) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 111, |
| "end": 127, |
| "text": "(Popowich. 1985)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 50, |
| "end": 58, |
| "text": "Figure 5", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In the interpretations of some ~mple sentences, which can be found in Figure 5 -2, some liberties are taken with the semantic notation.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 70, |
| "end": 78, |
| "text": "Figure 5", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Variables of the form wN. where N is any integer, represent entities that are to be instantiated from some database. Thus. any interpretation containing wN will be a question. Possessives. like John's tab/e are represented as: can not be interpreted correctly by the grammar. Inverted sentences are preceded by the word Query in the output. Also. proper nouns are assumed to unambiguously refer to some object, and thus are no longer followed by a unique integer. Analysis times for obtaining an interpretation are give 9 in CPU seconds.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The total time includes the time spent looking for all other possible parses.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Results obtained with SAUMER compare favourably to those obtained from the ProGram system (Evans and Gazdar. 1984) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 90, |
| "end": 114, |
| "text": "(Evans and Gazdar. 1984)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "ProGram operates on grammars defined according to the current GPSG formalism (Ga2dar and Pullum. 1982). but was not developed with efficiency as a major consideration.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The grammar used with ProGram. which is given in (Popowich. 1985) . is similar to the AAA [vp,pp(Prep,Feat) ,np(Caae,Numb,Foat),optional] , ( Cat1 m> X. Cot2, Y : Sem m> CetlIHoie m> X, Cat2OHalo, Y : Sen ) ) ) . grammar used by SAUMER. except that it has a much smaller lexicon, and allows neither relative clauses nor possessive forms. Running on the same machine as SAUMER. ProGram required about 35 seconds to parse the sentence does John take cmpelOl, with a total processing time of abo,.u 140 second.~ SAUMER required just over 2 seconds to parse this phrase, and had a total processing time of about 4 seconds.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 49, |
| "end": 65, |
| "text": "(Popowich. 1985)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 90, |
| "end": 107, |
| "text": "[vp,pp(Prep,Feat)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "As it stands, the semantic notation used by SAUMER does \"not contain much of the relevant information that \"would be required by a real system. Tense. number and adverbial information, including concepts like location and time. would be required in the AAA. If the SSL description were to be extended, with the resulting system behaving as a natural language interface of the AAA. a more database directed semantic notation would prove invaluable.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "APPLICATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Although this application of metarules allows succinct descriptions of a grammar, several problems have been observed.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "PRESENT IXMITATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "6." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Since each metarule is applied to the rule base only once. the order of the metarules is very important.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "PRESENT IXMITATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "6." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In our sample grammar, the passive verb phrases were generated before the sentence inversion transformation was processed, and then the slash category propagation transformations were executed. For the curreat implementation, if a rule generated by transformation T1 is to be subjected to transformation T2. then T1 must appear before T2. Moreover. no rule that is the result of ....", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "PRESENT IXMITATIONS", |
| "sec_num": "6." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "-can be operated on by TI. It would be preferable to remove this restriction and impose one. that is less severe. such as the finite closure restriction which is described in (Thompson. 1982) and used by ProGram.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 175, |
| "end": 191, |
| "text": "(Thompson. 1982)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "T2", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "With this improvement, the only restriction would be that a transformation could only be applied once in the derivation of a rule.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "T2", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The system can not currently process rules expressed in the Immediate Dominance/ Linear Precedence (ID/LP) format. (Gazdar and Pullum. 1982) . With this format, a production rule is expressed with an unordered right hand side with the ordering determined by a separate declaration of //near precedence.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 115, |
| "end": 140, |
| "text": "(Gazdar and Pullum. 1982)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "T2", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For example, a passive verb phrase rule could appear something like\" The result would be that the pp(by) could appear before or after the pp(to), since there is no restriction on 'their relative positions. If this format were implemented, only one passive metarule would have to be explicitly stated. The direct processing of ID/LP gremm~rs is discussed in (Shieber. 1982) . (Evans and Gazdar. 1984) . and (Popowich. forthcoming).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 357, |
| "end": 372, |
| "text": "(Shieber. 1982)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 375, |
| "end": 399, |
| "text": "(Evans and Gazdar. 1984)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "T2", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "SSL appears to adequately capture the flavour of GPSG descriptions while allowing more procedural control. Investigation into a relationship between SSL and GPSG grammars could result in a method for translating GPSG grammars into SSL for execution by SAUMER. Further research could also provide a relationship between SSL and other grammar formalisms, such as /ex/c~-funct/on,d granmu~$ (Kaplan and Bresnan. 1982) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 388, |
| "end": 414, |
| "text": "(Kaplan and Bresnan. 1982)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "CONCLUSIONS", |
| "sec_num": "7." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The prolog implementation of SAUMER. allowing left recursion in rules, should facilitate a more detailed study of the specification language, and of some problems associated with metarule specifications. Due to the easy separability of the semantic rules, one could attempt to introduce a more database oriented semantic notation and develop an interface to a real database.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "CONCLUSIONS", |
| "sec_num": "7." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "One could then examine system behaviour with a larger rule base and more involved transi'ormations in an applications environment like that of the AAA. However. as is apparent from the application presented here and from preliminary experimentation (Popowich. 1984 ) (Popowich. 1985 , further investigation of the efficient operation of this Prolog implementation with large grammars will be required.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 249, |
| "end": 264, |
| "text": "(Popowich. 1984", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 265, |
| "end": 282, |
| "text": ") (Popowich. 1985", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "CONCLUSIONS", |
| "sec_num": "7." |
| } |
| ], |
| "back_matter": [ |
| { |
| "text": "l would like to thank Nick Cercone for reading an earlier version of this paper and providing some useful suggestions.The comments of the referees were also helpful. Facilities for this research were provided by the Laboratory for Computer and Communications Research. ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "bib_entries": { |
| "BIBREF3": { |
| "ref_id": "b3", |
| "title": "Deai~in~ and automating the quality mmesmment of a knowledge-ba.m~ system: the initial automated academic advisor experience", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "P", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Mcfetridge", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [ |
| "T" |
| ], |
| "last": "Strzaikowski", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1984, |
| "venue": "IEEE Principles of Knowledge-Based Systems Proceedings", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "193--205", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "McFetridge P. and Strzaikowski. T. Deai~in~ and automating the quality mmesmment of a knowledge-ba.m~ system: the initial automated academic advisor experience, pages 193-205. IEEE Principles of Knowledge-Based Systems Proceedings. Denver. Colorado. 1984.", |
| "links": null |
| } |
| }, |
| "ref_entries": { |
| "FIGREF0": { |
| "text": "2:Pattern Matching for Nonterminals 3Apparently no1 present in the Hewle1\"t Packard system(Gawron, 1982) or the ProGram system(Evans and Ga~l~r, 1984)", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF1": { |
| "text": "s(A) --> {not element(A,[foo])L X. vp : Sere s --> np(nom), X. vp(pass). Y : Sere (b) s(inter) --> np. vp : Seam s --> vp : Sere For the verb phrase rule shown in (3.10): (3.10) vp(active.[MIN]) --> v([MIN],Root,Type,_) with (intrans in Type) : v\"", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF2": { |
| "text": "(Sem, Type. ['John'.runs]. []).", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF3": { |
| "text": "not equal B. the result of the translation is: (4.6) Af_I.N n) :-gap(G._l. 2). B(2.No). A(G,[]). <Xl (No,N 1 ) ..... tXn(Na_l.Nn),", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF5": { |
| "text": "b, c. X --> a@foo --> b. X. c(foo) appears, then a predicate of the form:(4.9) tr~s(M. L1._2._3.X]. L1._2.X._4])", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF6": { |
| "text": ".Type._) with trans in Type. n~[x.A.x] .... ) : <[ v\" & np\" ] . The list produced by the pattern match would resemble: '.12) [ vp(active.Numb). v(Numb.R.Type._) with [[].trans in Type~]]. nr([x.A.~] .... ).", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF7": { |
| "text": "two vp's on opposite sides of the metarule do not match. So the transformed list would resemble: .R.Type._) with [[].trans in Type,[]].", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF8": { |
| "text": "poss table]> Although multiple possessives which associate from left to right are allowed, group possessives as seen in: (5.2) the man who passed the course's book and in phrases like: (5.3) John's driver's lice.ace", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF9": { |
| "text": "Figure 5-1: Excerpt from Grammar", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF10": { |
| "text": "Summary of Test Results", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF1": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "/-Case ,s described by a mask. [N.A,G], with free variables for Ham., Ace. and Gen. */ add vp(octive.Numb) ~> v(Numb. Root. T, _) with (Root in [pass.give,teach,offer], indabj in T. trees in T), np([x.D.x] .... ). np([x.*.x] ....", |
| "html": null, |
| "num": null, |
| "content": "<table><tr><td/><td/><td/><td>)-1 : <[ v' a np' a np-t' ]</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">Je WH--<lueetions in inverted sentences */</td><td>evcl(y~, Var), NP -np(Case.Numb,Feat)</td></tr><tr><td>\u2022 ( NPONP ~></td><td colspan=\"3\">[]. |agreement(Case)| : Var )</td></tr><tr><td>, (e(inv) ~></td><td colspan=\"3\">np([x,A,x],Nomb,Feat) with Clword in Feat, e(inv)Onp([x,A,x],Numb,Feat)</td></tr><tr><td/><td colspan=\"3\">: <[ (Vat lads s') \u2022 np' ] ).</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">/* passive trenefarnmtion e/</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">add vp(octive.Numb) --> v(Numb.R.Type.Subtype) with (X. trees in Type0 Y). npo Z : <[? np \u00b0]</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">mE> vp(poss,Humb)</td><td>~></td><td>v(Numb,be,T,S)--I with aux in T,</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td/><td>v(Numi:gpaetpart, R. Type, Subtype) with (X, trees in Type, Y),</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td/><td>Z. optianal(pp(by._)) : x~ Imda [ optional\" k <[ ? x~ ] ] .</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"3\">/* sentence inversion */</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">add vp(T.[MiN]) ~></td><td colspan=\"2\">v([MJN],R,Type,S) with (X, aux in Type, Y), Z : $em</td></tr><tr><td>m> s(inv)</td><td colspan=\"3\">--> v([UIN],R,Type,S) with (X.aux in Type,Y), np([Nl,x,x],[MlN],_),</td><td>Z :[np' a Semi.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">/, metarule for the propagation of \"holes\" in the \"slosh\" categories e/</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">farail Hole in [pp(Prep,Feat),np(Case,Nomb,Foot)]</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">. ( forall Cat1 in [s(Type),vp.pp(Prep,Feat),optional]</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">\u2022 ( forall Cat2 in</td><td/></tr></table>" |
| } |
| } |
| } |
| } |
