{ "paper_id": "C69-0801", "header": { "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", "date_generated": "2023-01-19T12:32:12.318160Z" }, "title": "", "authors": [], "year": "", "venue": null, "identifiers": {}, "abstract": "", "pdf_parse": { "paper_id": "C69-0801", "_pdf_hash": "", "abstract": [], "body_text": [ { "text": "In this paper I describe ~ system for the on-line semantic analysis of texts of up to paragraph length. It was programmed o~d applied in Q32 LISP 1.5 to material of two sorts: newspaper editorials and passages of classic~ philosophical argument. The immediate purpose of the analysis was to resolve the word-sense mmbiguity of the texts: to tag each word of the texts to one and only one of its possible senses or meanings, and to do so in such a way that anyone could judge the output's success or failure without knowing the coding system. The system tackles texts of up to paragraph length because I take it as a working hypothesis that many word-sense ambiguities cannot be resolved within the bounds of the conventional text sentence~ there simply isn't enough context available.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The system attempts to detect semantic forms (which I call templates ) directly in coded text, and not by means of a conventional syntax analysis. This restriction sets the present approach apart from the better-kno~ ones.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "However, s~ approach like the present one still has to show how to obtain the information contained in a conventional syntax analysis, and I shall do that below\u00b0 For each paragraph of text examined the systez derives a nested structure of the semantic templates, which can be thought of as its semantic representation. As I shsX1 show, it may be necessary for the system to enlarge its own dictionary in an on-line mode in order to obtain such a representation.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "From a representation, a word-sense resolution o~ the text is read off and printed out, since the representation contains one and only one sense representation for each constituent word of the text.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The basic item, tha template, is intended to express, in coded form, the message content of an elementary clause or sentence. Thus, if we had to analyse the sentence \"The old postman is angry\", I would expect to match with it a template that could be interpreted as \"A certain kind of man is in a certain state\". Similarly, if analysing thQ clause \"The wicked wizard\", I would expect to match with it a tsmplate that could be interpreted \"a man is of a certain kind\". The main hypothesis of the system of sense analysis is that one can build up a 'proper semantic sequence' of such templates as a representation of \"semantically compatible\" fragments of text. At the end of the paper I shall discuss the possibility of ex~lig.at~n~ the difficult notion of \"meaningful lan~age\". But at the beginning I am assuming that, if a text is meaningful then its parts must cohere together in some structured way, and that \"semantic compatibility\" might express that way. This working hypothesis will also mean that the word-senses that can participate in such a proper sequence will be the appropriate ones. By \"appropriate senses\" I ~ean simply the dictionary word-senses that a translator of the text would wish to distinguish from the inappropriate ones. Fragments I & 2 are semantically compatible (beth essentially assert that a structure is of a certain sert: (I) that a system is changing, (2) that a structure is the public's.)", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "This requires that one takes \"to be of a certain sort\" in its usual wide logical sense to cover such notions as change and movement: .~ are semantically compatible (both essentially assert that something is moving in some way).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "are semantically compatible (both essentially assert that the railways are near to us in time in some way).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "7&8", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "are semantically compatible (both essentially assert that something is taking or removing something). that s~me structure is changing or about to change).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "7&8", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Notice that semantic parallelisms of this sort between fragments are sufficient to resolve at least one ambiguity in each of the pairs of fragments:", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "7&8", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "for examplethe correct sense of \"habits\" for fragment 2 is \"structure of behaviour\", rather than the less-common \"articles of dress\". Thu_~s pointing out this parallelism is also selecting the appropriate sense of \"habits\".", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "7&8", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Ten paragraph length texts were chosen for analysis: five from randomly chosen Times~'editorials (data texts); and five from the works of philosophers, Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza, Hume and Wittgenstein. The reason for the choice of ~his type of material will emerge in the discussion. Each paragraph was stored as a list of sentences on a LISP file, and an alphabetical concordance for the texts was obtained with the aid of standard routines.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "THE TEXTS AND SEF~NTIC DICTIONARY", "sec_num": "2." }, { "text": "From this the semantic dictionary was written.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "THE TEXTS AND SEF~NTIC DICTIONARY", "sec_num": "2." }, { "text": "The information stored for each dictionary entry word is a list of pairs, each member of which consists of a left-hand member which is a semantic formula such as (((THIS POINT) TO) SIGN) THING), and a right-hand member~which is a sense description of the meaning of the corresponding formula, such as (COIv~AS8 AS INSTRUMENT POINTING ~O~TH). Each such pair (called a sense-pair) corresponds to one sense of the dictionary entry word. The sense description (right-hand member of pair) serves only to explain to the operator, in ordinary language print-out, which particular sense of the word is being operated on at any give~ stage of the procedure. The sense .", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "THE TEXTS AND SEF~NTIC DICTIONARY", "sec_num": "2." }, { "text": "descriptions are not used as data for computation, except for looking at their first item to get the ne~e of the word in question. with m~ker words like 'of' and 'for'. These are delimited at their other end by the character 'fo', and are placed as . as are a whole before the word they qualify/adjectives before the preceding noun and so on. 0nly after this rearrs~ugement are the fragments passed on to the matching functions.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "THE TEXTS AND SEF~NTIC DICTIONARY", "sec_num": "2." }, { "text": "The reason for the re-ordering is that when a template has been matched with a fragment, the subsequent routines seek for the qualifiers of a noun or verb only to the left of it. Thus a phrase \"a book of rules\" goes to the matching routines as \"a of rules fo book\".", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "THE TEXTS AND SEF~NTIC DICTIONARY", "sec_num": "2." }, { "text": "The purpose of the fragment unit is to define a unit of context between the word ~aqd thc sentence, as usually understood. I shall call \"internal\" those semantic routines which operate wholly within fragments, and \"external\" those which ", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "9.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The intuitive goal is that there should be just one string of templates in the set, and hence a unique ambiguity resolution of the text. However, the possibility of a number of independent resolutions cannot be excluded a priori.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "10.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Thus the outcome of applying these procedures to a text is either nothing, or a string of sense-explanations for the words of the text.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "10.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "In the case where the outcome is nothing, further procedures are defined whereby the system returns, as it were, to the beginning, adjusts one or more dictionary entries in a determinate way and then tries again to resolve the text. Thus the positive outcome described may be achieved after any one of a finite number of tries.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "10.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "As will be seen, there is a limit to the number of possible tries; and after it has been exhausted, the system has to conclude that the text cannot be resolved by this particular method.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "10.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The procedures of resolution can be put in the form of a set of phrase-structure rules which produce a nesting of frames of formulae from an initial paragraph symbol P. The rules are given in their generative rather than their analytic form, but I give the \"lowest-level\" rules first, because they are the ones applied at the first stage 0f an~ysis. The presentation will thus end up, rather than start, with highest level rules P\u00f7..., where P is a \"paragraph symbol\" analogous to the sentence marker, S, in conventional gram~.ar.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "10.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Following what has been said above: D.5. A frame for a fragment is a string of formulae such that each word of the fragment that has a (non-null) dictionary entry is represented by oue and only one formula, and that formula has the same linear order in the as the 11.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "I", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "corresponding word in the fragment. Thus the set of all frames consistent with this definition (and with the dictionary entries for the words of some fragment) constitutes an initial representation of a fragment in the system.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "I", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "We can now define the fundamental notion of template.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "I", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "D.6. A bare template is any concatenated triple of elements that can be produced by Rules I-6 below. (The rules 6. are only a sample). These rules produce bare templates in the form: ", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "I", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "V + N2 R2. V", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "R_~I. T + NI +", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Substantive (", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "R_~I. T + NI +", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Since ", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "14.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The six formulae so defined give content to the corresponding bare template (expressed by the heads of three of the formulae).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "16.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The rules 12-16 specify the other three formulae in such a way that each of them c~m be the qualifier of one of the formulae with a head defining part of the bare template.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "16.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The rules 12-16 (not given here for reasons of space) are, in effect, rules producin~ an ordered pair of formulae such that the first is ~m appropriate qualifier for the second. 'Thus rule 13i produces an adjective type of formula (one ending in KIND) before a noun-type of formula, and so on.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "16.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The full templates are the items with which the system really operates. They can be illustrated by contrast with bare templates by considering fragment 3 of the paragraph examined earlier. That fragment was \"It is the old permanent way\". Among the bare templates produced for it by the system are the following two: In this the 'it' and 'is' have no qualifiers, hence the LISP 'NIL's in those positions. Bare templates other than these two wore matched onto the fragment, but only these two could be expanded in this way. Hence these two were the 'survivors' and the others were rejected from !hrther consideration.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "16.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "When expanding in this way to prodrce fuXl templates from bare ones the following met~,~rule (i15) is applied example, a fragment consisted not of an assertion form, but of a noun phrase like \"the black wizard\" j where the heads of the appropriate codings for \"black\" and \"wizard\" would b , KIND and ~h~N respectively. As there is no verb, a debilitated template of the N+N form would match onto these two heads, and that would then be converted into ~'~+BE+~IND. which is the intuitively correct interpretation (WIZ2~D is BLACK).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "16.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The dummy verb is added in the way d~scribed; and in cases like this, where the first head is the predicate KIND, the order of the two heads is reversed, so as to give the I~:~+BE+ KIND form. This transposition is defined by R11i. The original Englis~ for the first two fragments of that paragraph was \"Britain's transport system and with tt the travelling public's habits are cha~i~Ig\".", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "16.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The sense constructor\" procedure.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "16.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "A procedure was built in to the system to deal with the This procedure was not called upon for the newspaper paragraphs, but it produced some interesting suggestions in the case of two of the philosophical paragraphs.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "16.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "In CONSTRUCT:~ MODE dialogues like the following are possible: ", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "27.", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "(", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "27.", "sec_num": null } ], "back_matter": [], "bib_entries": { "BIBREF3": { "ref_id": "b3", "title": "Natural Input for a Computer Problem-Solving System", "authors": [ { "first": "R", "middle": [ "D" ], "last": "Laing", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "J", "middle": [], "last": "~atz", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "P", "middle": [], "last": "Postal", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1965, "venue": "N.I.T", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Laing, R.D. 7. ~atz, J., and Postal, P. Natural Input for a Computer Problem-Solving System. Ph.D. Thesis, N.I.T. (1965)", "links": null }, "BIBREF4": { "ref_id": "b4", "title": "London (1937) ~algorithm for Automatic Olause delimitation in English sentences. Lockheed Missiles and Space Co", "authors": [], "year": 1963, "venue": "Universals of Language. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge ~iass", "volume": "5224", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "The Logical Syntax of Language, Routledge, London (1937) ~algorithm for Automatic Olause delimitation in English sentences. Lockheed Missiles and Space Co., Tech. Rept. 5.13.64. 5. (~Mrch, 1964) Universals of Language. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge ~iass. (1963) Some aspects of the thematic organization of the English Clause. R~hND Hemorandum 5224 (January, 1967).", "links": null }, "BIBREF5": { "ref_id": "b5", "title": "The D~vided Self", "authors": [], "year": 1960, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "The D~vided Self. Tavistock Publications, London (1960) fm integrated theory of Linguistic Descriptions.", "links": null }, "BIBREF7": { "ref_id": "b7", "title": "~rgum~nt and Proof in Metaphysics~ from an E~pirical Point of View", "authors": [ { "first": "", "middle": [ "Y" ], "last": "Wilks", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1968, "venue": "Cs~bridge", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Wilks. Y. ~rgum~nt and Proof in Metaphysics~ from an E~pirical Point of View. Ph.D. Thesis, Cs~bridge. (1968)", "links": null }, "BIBREF8": { "ref_id": "b8", "title": "te page 19: The negation class of elements for each element is derived inductively by a separate procedure.The notion onv\u00a2lved is like that of logical contrary~an element ~ud any member of its n~gatien class are partly s2nonymous and partly exclusive\u00b0For example, an entity can be basically a ~TU~F or basically a THING", "authors": [], "year": null, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "te page 19: The negation class of elements for each element is derived induc- tively by a separate procedure.The notion onv\u00a2lved is like that of logical contrary~an element ~ud any member of its n~gatien class are partly s2nonymous and partly exclusive\u00b0For example, an entity can be basically a ~TU~F or basically a THING;it cannot be both so each of these elements is in the negatien class of the other\u00b0", "links": null } }, "ref_entries": { "FIGREF0": { "type_str": "figure", "text": "A paragraph in fragment form and it's semantic compatibilities. Let's now look at possible semantic compatibilities between fragments of the paragraph (marked with braces in the left hand margin of the figure above).", "uris": null, "num": null }, "FIGREF1": { "type_str": "figure", "text": "scan text outside]particular fragment in order to resolve it,~ &.. word-senses. $. THE SYSTEM OF S~\u00a3'~TTIO ~L~LYSIS. Production of single bare templates The present system replaces each fragment of text by a number of strings of formulae (fra~es) constructed from th~ formulae for the words of the fragment. It then searches each frame and replaces it by a number of matchinj templates, or meaning structures. One can display these procedures schematically as follows: ..,~_-~-~ from the form-strings) Fragments ~__.~-\"/ (of formulae~ ~---'' / (of text) ~. Fig. 2. Attac.hment of text to templates. In the course of these procedures, therefore, each fragment of text is tagged to a number of templates, and so each such template is tagged to ~ome n~.r~cul,'ir sei~c~ion of the wordsenses for the words of a fragm,+~:~:~. The purpose of the subsequent procedures -is to re4u.: th.'..~ '~fragment ambiguity\" by specifying a set of str~!.~g~J : ~ .[-~ templates, one template correspcnd!~ to each tex-~ ~.~ ~ ......... ,~.,,~. ,. ,~\" so specifying a p~rticular s~-~ of worO,sensec .,.r '-h ~. wo~.~ of the whole text.", "uris": null, "num": null }, "FIGREF2": { "type_str": "figure", "text": "~ BE I{3. N2 ~ KIND, THIS, GRAIN, THING, SIGN. R4. NI ~GRAIN, THIS, THING, PART, SIGN, ~N, FOLK, STUFF, 'WHOLE, WORLD. R5i. (NI ->THIS) +...+ N2-~ PI~RT, ~AV, FOLK, STUFf, WHOLE, WORLD ii. (NI ~, THING) +...~ N2 ~, PART, STUFF, 'WHOLE, WORLD iii. (NI ~ P:/{T) +...+ N2 ~, P~LRT, STUFF, WIdOLE, WORLD iv. (NI ~ SIGN) +...+ N2-> PI~RT, STUFF v. (NI @ N:~) +...+ N2-~P~{T, FOLK, STUFF, ~t~N vi. (NI -> FOLK) +...+ N2 -> PART, ~L~N, FOLK, STUFF vii. (NI -~ STUFF)+.. .+ N2->P.~IT, STUFF, ]WHOLL, WORLD viii. (NI -> ~,WHOLE)+.. .+ N2 9 P~iRT, STUFF, WHOLE,~OP~LD ix. (NI -) WORLD)+...+ N2 ~ P:-~T, STUFF, ~K4OLE, WORLD x. (NI -> GRI~IN)+...+ N2 -> P.~T R6i. (NI -)GRAIN)+...+ V ~ P~IR, DO, C~USE, CH~NGE,Hf.VE ii. (NI -) THIS) +...+ V -~. PAIR, DO, CAUSE, OH_~GE,H~VE The form of rules 5 and 6 is simpl.~/ ~ \"onveni~ut abbreviation of a more conventional form. For ex~mp] ~ R5 iv. (NI @ SIGN) ~.. o+ ~2 9 P~'~T STUFF 12. is simply an abbreviated expression of the two contextdependent phrase-structure rules: SIGN+...+ N2 -~ SIGN+...+ Pi~T, and SIGN+...+ N2 -)SIGN+...+ STUFF.", "uris": null, "num": null }, "FIGREF3": { "type_str": "figure", "text": "( IT IS THE OLD P'Ei~I';~NENT WAY) ((THn~G BE SIGN) (((THIS THING) (IT .,S IN.~TII, X~TE PiI((BRITAINS TP~'~SPORT SYSTE~4S ARE CI~NGING)2(~d~D WITH IT TIYE TRAVELLING PUBLICS HJ~BITS)3(IT IS THE OLD PEP~IANENT WAY)~4(~'/HICH ONCE MORE IS EZ~RGING)t.. 5(AS T~ PACE~a~)6(~I~LLINES LATELY HAVE BEEN LOSING TP~d~FIC)[V(TO MODERNIZED P~%ILWAYS)-8(RAILWAYS AT LAST ~E BEGINNING)f9 ~-10(TO TAKE SO~ CI~S (OFF THE CONGESTED SYSTE2,iS TO Tj~ THE WEIGHT)(IF THE NEW IDE~S ARE FORWI~D PRESSED)L12" }, "TABREF3": { "type_str": "table", "text": "Rules 1-11 are nonrecursive, there is no problem about ordering the Iroductions in this way. Apart from t he forms given in the table, there are only vacuous cases such ....... KIND) ...KIND) ...GRAIN) , and ii ...... FOLK) ..... DO) ...GPJ~IN) .", "num": null, "html": null, "content": "
15.
form of TRANSPORT.Thus, by the semantic coding system
described above, those two ~will contain the
as @+@+~. following heads, and in the order shown:
The above table is intended to make clear the relation
between the various standard forms (in the rightmost column) Now the above rules generate both
and the corresponding \"items in frames\" produced or recognized
(middle column). (FOLK+DO+GR~N) Thus in the generative mode, text items are and (KIND+GRAIN)
produced from the standard forms by transposition and deletion. as strings of text-items; the latter by deletion from
(NI+BE+KIND) and (KIND+N1).It is clear that if the form
of a
conventional grammar; namely,pack theframeas
tightly as possible, or, in other words,produce the
fullest possible template.
Further production rules limit the templates actually
produced, and these require the notion of full template,
defined as follows:
D.IO.A full template is two triples of formulae such that
the heads of the first triple constitute a bare template, snd
the second triple can be produced from the first by the rules
12-16.
D.11.verb) The six formulae constituting a ~ull template are
called text-values.
" }, "TABREF6": { "type_str": "table", "text": "26.cases where the system returned (NO RESOLUTION ALL PATHS BLOC~D) at the teletype.", "num": null, "html": null, "content": "
This situation could arise for a
number of reasons; the text fragments did not cohere together
sufficiently; a vital word sense had been left out of the
dictionary; or a word in the text was being used in a new
and original sense.An obvious suggestion for tackling
this is to allow the word dictionary to enlarge itself:
to supply an additional sense entry for the word that is
holding the procedure up, if it can be found.Such a const-
ruction could thought of as adding a new rule F -a, where
P is a formula and a word name, and so expanding to a new
rule system as the system adjusts to the particular text.
In practice PARSPARA examined the value of a free
variable BESTPARS each time it failed to parse a frame
completely.It stored as th8 value of BESTPARS the parsing
tree containing the templat~ that had been rewritten least.
It seemed a good first guess at the recalcitrant word that
it was in template that 'cohered' least with its neigbours.
If all the frame blocked PARSPARA would print (CONSTRUCTER MODE)
and evaluate a function of no variables called C0~TSTRUCTER.
This function controls all subsequent operations via the
READ and PRINT functions at the teletype.CONSTRUCTER looks
a~ the value of the recalcitrant template in BESTPA~S and
suggested that a word in the corresponding fragment have its
dictionary of sense pairs enlarged by identifying the recalci-
trant word with the most 'semantically close' word in the
paragraph.If the operator accepts the system's suggestion
at the teletype, the system is rerun with the enlarged
dictionary to try and get a resolution.In such a case (or
if none of the system's suggestions are acceptable to the
operator) the system returns to the normal operating mode.
" } } } }