| { | |
| "paper_id": "C92-1016", | |
| "header": { | |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", | |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T12:34:51.678360Z" | |
| }, | |
| "title": "Using Active Constraints to I)", | |
| "authors": [], | |
| "year": "", | |
| "venue": null, | |
| "identifiers": {}, | |
| "abstract": "Active constraints of tile CO,lslratnl higic programin,rig paradigm allow (l) the reduction of the search space of progr~tms and (2) a very concise representation of the problcnls. These two l)rop erties are particuhtrly interesting for I)arsing prob-[elns : they can hel I) us to reduce non-determinisln and to use large coverage gramlnars. In this paper, we describe how to use Slleh constraints tot parsing ID/LP grammars and propose an inlplenlelmtl, iou in Prolog Ill.", | |
| "pdf_parse": { | |
| "paper_id": "C92-1016", | |
| "_pdf_hash": "", | |
| "abstract": [ | |
| { | |
| "text": "Active constraints of tile CO,lslratnl higic programin,rig paradigm allow (l) the reduction of the search space of progr~tms and (2) a very concise representation of the problcnls. These two l)rop erties are particuhtrly interesting for I)arsing prob-[elns : they can hel I) us to reduce non-determinisln and to use large coverage gramlnars. In this paper, we describe how to use Slleh constraints tot parsing ID/LP grammars and propose an inlplenlelmtl, iou in Prolog Ill.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Abstract", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "body_text": [ | |
| { | |
| "text": "Logic programming is one of the nlost useful tools in computational linguistics. These two domains are progressing very rapidly. The former with the emergence of the constraint paradignl and the latter with the systematic use of well-formalized linguistic theories. In the l~st few years, natural lal> guage processing (hereafter NLP) and more pre cisely syntax have created tools allowing expression of general knowledge.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Constraints simplify parsing problems to a con siderable extent, both in a formal and computational way. From a formal point of view, we will see that they allow a very good adequacy between linguistic aim computational theories. We know that this prol)erty is essential to solve generality, reusability and coverage prolflems. On the otimr hal,d, from a computatiolml point of view, con straints set up a control of the I)rocesses which reduces non-determmisnl m parsing.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The question is to know whether it, is possible to illlph!tlleIlt a I)arsiag Illethod I)ased oil actllal eoilstraints. The answer depends on the choice of the grmmnatical formalism. We think thai the II)/LP formalism used lit (IPS(-I theory can bring a sohl tion to this I)roblem.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "In this paper, we will describe a parsing method based on [D/LP formalism using boolean constraints. We will show that this nlethod agrees with th( goals of generality and corm'el. ", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "NX ~ ('~,...,C,,", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "can be interpreted as the fl~llowmg implication :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "(,'1 A ... A (.',, D ,S'X", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "the clausal form of which is :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "~Ci V", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Introduction", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Because of the ui,iquei~ess of the positive literal, we can interpret a PS-.rule as a Ilorn clause, with a direct translation into I'rolog. Thus, a context-free gr~unlnar, represenled by a set. of PS rule, corresponds to a set of clauses. To verify the grammaticality of a sentence is tluls equivMent to proving the COllSiSteacy of a set of clauses.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "There is, howew,r, a restriction in the analogy hetwee[l P~-rtlleS &lid claltses : a [1111', detines all order on ils right-haI.l--side chunelltS, whereas a clause does not. This restriction has important coliseqllenct,s 011 tho generality of the lileChalliSlllS.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "hldeed, lhe noti(m of order iiivoIvi)s it multilllica tion of the rifles describing a giw~n phrase : we get as zn;nly rules as there are (:onfigural.ious. This is one of the limits of phrase structure gramlnars. ll)/l,l' formMism and boolean constraints will alk)w us to sMve this problem. \"Ore will obtain a nearly perfect adequacy bet.weeIl I.h~ theoretical iiiode] aiid its implementation. Within the classi fieation proposed m iF, van.s87], it will be a strong direct interl)retation of the model. This active/passive distinction can be useful for parsing, especially according to the type of knowledge that is constrained. Active constraints can easily be defined for syntactic structures and their formation. On the other hand, expressing relations between these structures with this kind of constraint is not always possible.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We will describe the principles governing the formarion of the structures. A syntactic structure can be of two types :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "* simplestructures : lexical categories (e.g. Del, N,V...)", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "\u2022 complex structures : phrases or propositions (e.g. NP, VP ... )", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The formation of complex structures is governed by two types of knowledge :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "\u2022 internal : specific information within a structure", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "\u2022 external : relations between structures", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Internal knowledge concerns the structure composition, independently of its context.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "For a phrase, it is the set of its constituents. External knowledge describes interactions between structures. They concern on the one hand the order and on the other hand tile government (in the sense of phrase-structure grammars : selection, agreement ...).", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "ID/LP formalism uses such a distinction : it separates information about immediate dominance (i.e. the set of possible constituents of a phrase) from that on linear precedence (i.e. the partial order relation between these constituents).", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "It is possible to consider these two types of knowledge as constraints (cf [Saint-Dizier91]). But it is important to distinguish their respective funetionings. We will illustrate this point by presenting principles for each type.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "o Internal knowledge Each complex structure must contain at least one particular element called the head. This category gives the phrase its type and its presence is compulsory. The other constituents are usually optional. We must specify that local constraints could require the presence of a particular category, but it is a sub-categorization aspect : it concerns relations between the sub-structures of the complex structure and is not specific to the structure itself. We will see that this distinction between optional and compulsory constituents can be represented directly as an active constraint.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": ", . \u2022 V ~(5',, V ,b'X", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "In the case of ID/LP formalism, the order constraints (i.e. linear precedence) cannot be easily used with an a priori reduction of the search space. Indeed, LP-rules define a partial order upon the set of categories. The LP-aeceptability relation uses this order and can be regarded as a constraint upon the domain-variables. It is a symbolic user-defined constraint. The use of this kind of constraint is possible in Chip", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "o External knowledge", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "(ef [Dincbas88]), but not in Pro- log III (cf [ColmerauergO]).", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "o External knowledge", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "tlowever, using this order relation as an actual constraint allowing the reduction of domainvariables is difficult. In so far as it is a partial order, the LP notion cannot be used to predict the categories that can follow a constituent. It is used during the parse to verify the possibility for each new category to appear at a given place in the syntactic structure.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "o External knowledge", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Generally speaking, internal properties allow an easier use of active constraints than external ones.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "o External knowledge", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "As we have seen, ID-rules of ID/LP formalism only contain tile set of possible constituents (without any notion of order). Therefore, an ID-rule is strictly equivalent to a clause.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Constraints and ID/LP formalism", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Example :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Constraints and ID/LP formalism", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "N P \"-'*id Del, N, AP ~ N P V ~De~ V ~N V ~AP", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Constraints and ID/LP formalism", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "This equivalence is the basis of the conciseness and generality properties of GPSG. But it is difficult to represent. As we have seen, logic programming cannot directly represent the non-ordered aspect of a clause. Ilowever, it is possible to represent this kind of information as active constraints. These must allow the expression of tile simple fact that a phrase is well-formed if it is at least composed of the constituents Ct,..., C,. Other relations between the structures (like order or selection) will only be verified if this constraint is satisfied.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Constraints and ID/LP formalism", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Practically, each rule descrihing a phrase cor: responds to a clause whose literals represent categories.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Constraints and ID/LP formalism", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "An ID-rule is thus translated into a boolean formula where each category corresponds to a boolean. The semantics of this representatiou is the following :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Constraints and ID/LP formalism", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "A literal is true if it corresponds to a well-formed structure. A structure is well-formed if it corresponds to a le~cical category (simple structure) or to a well-formed phrase (compler structure).", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Constraints and ID/LP formalism", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Thus, the boolean value of a complex structure is the interpretation of this formula, and so depends on the value of its constituents.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Constraints and ID/LP formalism", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Given the following set of ID-rules describing a NP :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "N P --q~ DeC N NP ~i,* N NP -old DeC AP, PP, N NP ~ia Det, AP, N NP --qa Det, PP, N", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "This set of rules corresponds to the following fornmla :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "(1)el A N)V (N)V (Det A AP A PP A N)V (Dot A AP A N)V (Det A PPA N) D NP", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "It is interesting to note that the ID/LP formalism strongly reduces the problem of PS-rules multiplication inherent in phrase-structure grammars, tlowever, as we have seen in tile previous example, there is still a redundancy in the information. Indeed, a set of rules describing a phrase allows us to distinguish between two types of constituents according to their ot)tional or eomtmlsory aspect. Hence, for each phrase we can define a minimal set of compulsory constituents (generally limited to the head of the phrase), which we call the minimal set of a phrase.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "In the previous example, the minimal set of the NP is {N}.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We introduce an additional restriction preventing the repetition of an identical category within a phr,~se. This restriction is very strong and has to be relaxed for some categories (such as PP). But it remains a general principle : most of the categories should not be repeated.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We then construct a principle defining tile wellformedness of complex structures. 't'his principle only concerns internal knowledge :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "A phrase is well-formed iff it respects the following properties : m it contains at least one head", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Ezample :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "In the logical paradigm (equivalence between a role and a clause), we say that a literal is true ~ it corresponds to a lexieal category of the parsed sentence or if it correslmnds to a well-formed phrase.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "\u2022 no constituent is repeated ~, all its embedded phrases are well-formed", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "This formation rule allows its to simplify the veritication of the grammatieality of a sentence. We simply need to verify the presence of the minimal set of compulsory constituents to indicate the wellformedness of a phrase. The boolean value of the complete structure is then evaluated recursively. If all the intermediate structures are true, the complete structure is also true and corresponds to a gralomatical sentence.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "\u2022 no constituent is repeated ~, all its embedded phrases are well-formed", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We will call realization the actual presence of a category in tile syntactic structure corresponding to a sentence. The verification process of the wellfornmdness of a phrase follows these steps 1. verifieatmn of the realizatiou of the minimal set 2. verification of the membershil) of the realized constituents within the minimal set 3. verification of the uniqueness of the constituents in a pllr,'~se", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "\u2022 no constituent is repeated ~, all its embedded phrases are well-formed", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "In an active constraint, we replace the set of clauses describing all the possible constructions with a system <)f constraints S defining the set of l)ossihle constituents and the condition of realization for the minitelal set. We can represent it as follow :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "4~ verification of the well4ormedness of embedded phrases", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Let G' he the set of possible constituents of a phrase XP, let X t>e the head of XI', let M be the minimal set such xs M = {X}UC' (where C' C C), and let zX be the disjtmction of the literals of M. It is interesting to note that the implication corresponding to the set of rules describing the NP in the previous example forms a system of constraints that can be simplified to {N D NP}. This property is verified for all phrases :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "4~ verification of the well4ormedness of embedded phrases", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Given a grammar G, VXP such that Xf' E G, lel A be the disjunction of the liter'Ms of the minimal set of XP, then the formula corresponding ~o the rules describing XP is simplified to {A D XP}.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "4~ verification of the well4ormedness of embedded phrases", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We thns have both a linguistic and a h)rmaljns-tit|cation of tile active constraint used to verify tile well formedness of a phrase.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "4~ verification of the well4ormedness of embedded phrases", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We will now describe the parsing strategy and its implementation. It consists in using tile information extracted from 1,P constraints to determine all the left-bounds of the phrases from the list of lexieal categories corresponding to a sentence. This process, unlike the left-corner one, relies on a distributional analysis of the categories and the verification of some properties.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation in Prolog III", | |
| "sec_num": "5" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We define the following flmctions which allow the initialization of the left boundaries.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation in Prolog III", | |
| "sec_num": "5" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "o First-legal daughters (noted I\"LD(P)) : this function defines for each phrase P the set of categories that can appear as left boudaries. It is de tined ,as follows ( LP relation between sets is noted with ~:) :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation in Prolog III", | |
| "sec_num": "5" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Let P be a phrase, ga such that f' -~ c~ then FLD, the set of first legal daughters, is defined ,'~s R)llows: m,D(P) = {e E ~ such that e -< ,, -{e} } <, Immediate precedence (noted ll',,(c)) : this fimetlon defines for each FLI) c of a phrase P the set of categories that can precede e in P. It is defined as follows :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation in Prolog III", | |
| "sec_num": "5" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Let P be a phrase, V(* such that P --\u00f7 o, let x be a non-terminal, let c E FLD(P), then IPv(e), the set of immediate precedence of c for P, is defined as follows: { ..... h that (x -4 c) or (,c E .... ", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 163, | |
| "end": 200, | |
| "text": "{ ..... h that (x -4 c) or (,c E ....", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation in Prolog III", | |
| "sec_num": "5" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "IPp(c) =", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation in Prolog III", | |
| "sec_num": "5" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "o Iu'tialize : this flmction verifies whether a category c is the actual left boundary of a phrase P. It is defined ms follow :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "... l neither x -< c nor e -< z ea:ist)}", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Let I be a string, let C be tile list of lexical categories of I, Ve E C, c' G N (set of non4erminal symbols) such that c' precedes c in C ;", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "... l neither x -< c nor e -< z ea:ist)}", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The syntactic structure of the sentence is built from a list of partially evaluated structures. The process consists in determining all the h.'ft bounds and, from this structure, in completing tire partial structures by an analysis of the other constituents of the phrase. This is done by verifying whether the current category can or cannot belong to the cnrrent phrase.We have at our disposal the set of possible constituents for each phrase, the LP constraints and the other instant|at|on principles of the GPS(] theory. After these verifications, if tile current category cannot belong to the current phrase, then we have reached the right boundary of the current ptm~se.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "c initializes S life E FLI)(S) anti e' \u00a2 IPs(e)", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Input sentence : This strategy allows a reduction of the search space. Parsing becomes a simple membership test of a category within a set.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Example :", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The following implementation considers only the ID/LP formalism (instead of the entire GPSG theory). We will not speak here about the other GPSG principles, bnt their insertion in the ID/LP module is very shnple.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation", | |
| "sec_num": "5.2" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The parsing mechanism consists in assigning the value true l.o the boo]eans corresponding to the categories a~s and when they appear. If the structure is simple (i.e. a lexical category), the LP-aeeeplability of this category in the phrase is checked and tire corresponding boolean is a.ssigned AC.I'ES DE COLING-92, NANTES, 23-28 AO(;F 1992 8 4 PROC. OV COLING-92, NANTES, At;c;. 23-28, 1992 tile vMue true. In the case where the l)otton> up tiltering detects a left-bound, tile corresponding boolean of tile current category is mssigned tile value true and tile embedded phrase is parsed before coming back to tile construction of tim current phrase. When we reach the right boundary, the well-forme(lness of tim embedded structures is checked (i.e. all the corresponding booleans must be true). If this is tile case, the corresponding boolean value is that of tile disjunction A of tile literals corresponding to the minimal set. The representation of tile categories and their associated Iiooleans will be done through two parallel lists which will be examined simultaneously during an affectation (or any other operation).", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation", | |
| "sec_num": "5.2" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "A l)hrase is described l)y the set. of its possil)le constituents, t,he set of its optional categories ~uld ~ forlnuls, using its tniniLnal set. '['lie two sets are represented by lists and the R)rmula is an imldiCadon of the form {A D XP}. This inlbrm~ttion is collected into a systenl of constraints ehar;teterizing each phra.se.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation", | |
| "sec_num": "5.2" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Here is a simplilied version of our parsing prc~ cess. The following predicates allow the parsing of a Ithrase and its simple or complex constituents. It c;m be noted that tile gramnm.tieal knowledge is lmshed at it low level. It is repn:sented by the set of constraints ~ssoeiated to each phrase. Moreover, at this level we do not use the notion of sub-eategorizatioil, but only rules concerning the general structure. We grill idSO notice the concisehess of this representation with reg;~rd to eh~ssical phra.se--strueture formalisms. The ID/LP formalism distinguishes between internal and external knowledge about syntactic structures. This characteristic allows the expression of parsing mechanisms at a very high level of generality. We can represent the description of a phrase in an extremely concise way with a rule clustering operation. These properties allow the use of active constraints. The result is an implementation in agreement with the theoretical nmdel respecting in particularl the generality and conciseness properties of GPSG. Moreover, active constraints efficiently control the progress of the processes and limit non-determinism of parsing. This last characteristic is very important for the ID/LP formalism which uses non-ordered rules implying an increase of the search space.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation", | |
| "sec_num": "5.2" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We have shown in this paper how to use active constraints for ID/LP formalism. We can apply the same approach to the entire GPSG theory interpreting features structures and instaneiation principles as formulas (cf [Blache92] ).", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 210, | |
| "end": 224, | |
| "text": "(cf [Blache92]", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation", | |
| "sec_num": "5.2" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The implementation presented here has been done in Prolog III on a Macintosh. From a coverage point of view, we can indicate that the rules in the grammatical formalism presented in our example roughly amounts to twenty standard ID-rules.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Implementation", | |
| "sec_num": "5.2" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Pit<It. OF COLING 92, NANrES, AU<;. 23-28, 1992", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "I)ROC. OF COIANG 92, NANTES, AtX;. 23-28, 1992", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "PROC. OF COLING-92, NANTES, AUG. 23-28, 1992", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "back_matter": [ | |
| { | |
| "text": "In the case of simple structures, afl;er checking tim l,P-aeceptalfility, the correslmndiug boolean is assigned tile value true (Instanciate rule) and tile parse of the current phrase is pursued.If the APhrase r,de fails, the right-bound of the phrase is reached and die parse is pursued at a superior level.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "annex", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "rFhe AilFanbeddedPhrase rule allows the parse of & ll(!W COIUptex Btriicttli'e. It begins with tile system of ins{ailing constraints describing this struc-tur~ (Coilstraints rule). TI,e wllidity of the con stituents is clmcked (CorrectConstituents and Valid rtdes) Before rettlrlling the boolean wthic of the parse for this phrg~se (variable S'). C,B, R,N P We can notice that in this representation, subcategorization consists in verifying the boolean values corresponding to the categories concerned.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 347, | |
| "end": 357, | |
| "text": "C,B, R,N P", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "AnEmbeddadPhr as e (<S, c>. l, 11, gag, Bool, A ) -, Constraints (S, C,B ,R,S' ) Instanciat e(c,C,B) APhrase(l, ii ,C,B,A) CorrectConstituent s (R, r) Valid(r,S,S' ,Cat,Boo]) ;", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Conclusion", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "6", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "bib_entries": { | |
| "BIBREF0": { | |
| "ref_id": "b0", | |
| "title": "Bottom-Up Filtering : a Parsing Strategy for GPSG", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "P. & J.-Y", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Blache", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Morin", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1990, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Blache P. & J.-Y. Morin (1990) Bottom-Up Filtering : a Parsing Strategy for GPSG, COLING'90.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF1": { | |
| "ref_id": "b1", | |
| "title": "Interpretation of GPSG with Constraint Logic Grammars", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Blache E", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1992, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Blache e. (1992) Interpretation of GPSG with Constraint Logic Grammars, ICEBOL '92.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF2": { | |
| "ref_id": "b2", | |
| "title": "An Introduction to PrologIII", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "A", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Colmerauer", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1990, | |
| "venue": "CACM", | |
| "volume": "33", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Colmerauer A. (1990) An Intro- duction to PrologIII, CACM, 33:7", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF3": { | |
| "ref_id": "b3", | |
| "title": "The Formal and Processing Models of CLG, proceedings of the 5th European Chapter", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "L", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Damas", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "N", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Moreira", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "G", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Varile", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1991, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Damas L., Moreira N. & Varile G. (1991) The Formal and Processing Models of CLG, proceedings of the 5th European Chapter of the ACL.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF4": { | |
| "ref_id": "b4", | |
| "title": "The Constraint Logic Programming Language CHIP, International conference on 5th Generation Computer Systems, ICOT", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "M", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Dinebas", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "P", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Vanilentenryck", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "H", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Simonis", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "A", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Aggoun", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "T", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Graf", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "F", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Berthier", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1988, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Dinebas M., Vanilentenryck P., Si- monis H., Aggoun A. Graf T. & Berthier F. (1988) The Constraint Logic Programming Language CHIP, International conference on 5th Generation Computer Systems, ICOT.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF5": { | |
| "ref_id": "b5", | |
| "title": "Theoretical and Computational InteITrelations of GPSG, Thesis", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "R", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Evans", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1987, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Evans R. (1987) Theoretical and Com- putational InteITrelations of GPSG, Thesis, University of Sussex.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF6": { | |
| "ref_id": "b6", | |
| "title": "Features and Values", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "F", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Guenthner", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1988, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Guenthner F. (1988) Features and Values 1988, CIS.Bericht-90-2, Mfinchen.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF7": { | |
| "ref_id": "b7", | |
| "title": "Features, Frames and Quantifier-free Formulae, in Logic and Logic Grammars for Language Processing", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "M", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Johnson", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1990, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Johnson M. (1990) Features, Frames and Quantifier-free Formulae, in Logic and Logic Grammars for Language Processing, P. Saint-Dizier & S. Szpakowicz eds, Ellis Hor- wood.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF8": { | |
| "ref_id": "b8", | |
| "title": "The Logic of Unification in Grammar", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "1%", | |
| "middle": [ | |
| "& W" | |
| ], | |
| "last": "Kasper", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Rounds", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1990, | |
| "venue": "Linguistics and Philosophy", | |
| "volume": "13", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Kasper 1%. & W. Rounds (1990) The Logic of Unification in Grammar, in Linguis- tics and Philosophy, 13:1.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF9": { | |
| "ref_id": "b9", | |
| "title": "Parsing as Deduction, ACL83, 21st Annual meeting", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "F", | |
| "middle": [ | |
| "& O" | |
| ], | |
| "last": "Pereira", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Warren", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1983, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Pereira F. & O. Warren (1983) Parsing as Deduction, ACL83, 21st Annual meeting.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF10": { | |
| "ref_id": "b10", | |
| "title": "Deterministic Left-corner Parser", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "D", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "&", | |
| "middle": [ | |
| "P" | |
| ], | |
| "last": "Lewis", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1970, | |
| "venue": "IEEE Conference Record of the llth Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata Theory", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "1%osenkrantz D. & P. Lewis (1970) Deterministic Left-corner Parser, IEEE Conference Record of the llth Annual Symposium on Switching and Automata The- ory.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF11": { | |
| "ref_id": "b11", | |
| "title": "Saint-Dizier P. (I991) Processing Language with Logical Types and Active Constraints, proceedings of the 5th European Chapter of the ACL", | |
| "authors": [], | |
| "year": null, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "[Saint-Dizier91] Saint-Dizier P. (I991) Processing Language with Logical Types and Active Constraints, proceedings of the 5th European Chapter of the ACL.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF12": { | |
| "ref_id": "b12", | |
| "title": "Parsing as Logical Constraint Satisfaction, in Logic and Logic Grammars for Language Processing", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "E", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Stabler", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1990, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Stabler E. (1990) Parsing as Logical Constraint Satisfaction, in Logic and Logic Grammars for Language Processing, P. Saint- Dizier & S. Szpakowiez eds, Ellis Horwood.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF14": { | |
| "ref_id": "b14", | |
| "title": "Constraint Satisfaction in Logic Programming", | |
| "authors": [], | |
| "year": null, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Constraint Satisfaction in Logic Pro- gramming, MIT Press.", | |
| "links": null | |
| } | |
| }, | |
| "ref_entries": { | |
| "FIGREF0": { | |
| "text": "The well-formedness constraint is : s = {A 7) xl,} Example : The well-formedness constraint for a Nt' is: {NDNI'} The well:formedness constraint for a PP is : { f'rel> A N P D I' P }", | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "num": null, | |
| "uris": null | |
| }, | |
| "FIGREF1": { | |
| "text": "'he old man sings. Categorization : Det.Adl.N. V Partial structure : S.(NP, Det).(AP, Adj).N.(VP, V) Complete structure : (S,(NP, Det,(AP, Adj),N),(VP, !7))", | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "num": null, | |
| "uris": null | |
| }, | |
| "FIGREF2": { | |
| "text": "Deseril)tion of the. implementation Let G be the following ll)/l,P grammar :NP-qa 1)el, N NP-'ia N NP ~ia Del, A P, I'P, N NP-q,t Det, Al', N NP-+ia Det, PP, N NP .'ia Det, Al', PP, N, l'Rcl Nt'-+ia Det, A 1', N, PRel NP ~id Det, PP, N, PRel NP-qd Det, N, PRel NP-~La N, t'Rel VI' ~id V VP--,i,t V, NP, PP Vl>-+id V, N} ) VP ~ia V, 1'1' AP--'L,L Adj I'P-'i,t l'ret', NP PRel-'id l'ro, NP, VPq}lm lbllowing predicates correspond to the heart of the parser for the grammar G :", | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "num": null, | |
| "uris": null | |
| }, | |
| "TABREF0": { | |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>2</td><td>Parsing</td><td>and deduction</td></tr></table>", | |
| "html": null, | |
| "text": "IIoth for historical itllll [orlilal reasolls, parsing turn ck)se relalions with logic The birth of Prolog, for example, w~s conditioimd by Ihat aud NLP was one of the early applications of this language. One of the re~molls, a.s shown in[PereiraS,g], is tiiat we", | |
| "type_str": "table", | |
| "num": null | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } |