| { | |
| "paper_id": "M91-1004", | |
| "header": { | |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", | |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T03:15:22.237487Z" | |
| }, | |
| "title": "MUC-3 LINGUISTIC PHENOMENA TEST EXPERIMEN T", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Nancy", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Chinchor", | |
| "suffix": "", | |
| "affiliation": { | |
| "laboratory": "", | |
| "institution": "Science Applications International Corporatio n", | |
| "location": { | |
| "addrLine": "10260 Campus Point Drive, M/S 1 2", | |
| "postCode": "9212", | |
| "settlement": "San Diego", | |
| "region": "CA" | |
| } | |
| }, | |
| "email": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": "", | |
| "venue": null, | |
| "identifiers": {}, | |
| "abstract": "", | |
| "pdf_parse": { | |
| "paper_id": "M91-1004", | |
| "_pdf_hash": "", | |
| "abstract": [], | |
| "body_text": [ | |
| { | |
| "text": "The evaluation of data extraction systems can be supplemented by determinin g performance of the systems on a representative selection of linguistic phenomena . The experiment performed as part of the MUC-3 evaluation was aimed at determinin g whether linguistic phenomena can be tested in isolation for state-of-the-art dat a extraction . Although not all of the methods of data extraction used by the participants in MUC-3 directly process linguistic phenomena, the methods are dealing with those phenomena in some manner because they are present in the input . Phenomena testing in MUC-3 is testing according to the characteristics of th e messages rather than characteristics of the systems processing those messages .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "I n order to determine the validity of phenomena testing at the current level of syste m performance, an experiment was run . The results of the experiment indicate that linguistic phenomena are isolatable and that performance for linguistic phenomen a can be measured using the MUC-3 scoring system .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The problem is to devise a test to measure the performance of a data extractio n system with respect to a single linguistic phenomenon . The experiment took several approaches to devising such a test to determine whether the phenomenon had bee n isolated . The design of the experiment required the choice of a linguistic phenomenon frequently appearing in the messages and critical to the template fill task .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "DESIGN", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The slots from phrases exhibiting the phenomenon would be scored an d compared to the overall scores . If there was no correlation with the overall scores , then the possibility that overall scores were fully determining the phenomenon' s scores would be eliminated and isolating the phenomenon would be possible . Th e slots filled from the sentences were scored and compared to the overall scores as wel l as the scores obtained for the slots filled from the phrases . If the scores for the sentences correlated more closely with the scores for the phrases than they did with th e overall scores, then it would be more likely that the scoring was isolating th e phenomenon . Processing of the phrase can have an effect on the processing of th e entire sentence . If the results for the phrases and the sentences coincide, then i t would be feasible to use scores for slots from entire sentences for future phenomen a testing .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "DESIGN", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Slots from phrases exhibiting well-defined subsets of the phenomenon woul d be scored and compared to each other. The results of the comparisons that can b e predicted or explained would give us more confidence that we have isolated th e phenomenon .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "DESIGN", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Altered messages would be produced without the phenomenon for purposes o f a \"minimal pair\" type test . The responses would be scored for slots filled from th e phrases that formerly constituted the phenomenon . The scores would be compared t o the scores for responses to the original messages containing the phenomenon . Th e comparison would provide more information concerning the success of isolating th e phenomenon .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "DESIGN", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Apposition was chosen as the linguistic phenomenon because of its frequenc y of occurrence in messages and its criticalness for slot fills . An example of an appositive from the test corpus is \"David Lecky, Director of the Columbus School .\" Ther e , were approximately 60 sentences in the test corpus containing one or more appositives which were critical to slot fills . Preliminary phenomena testing for thre e other phenomena occurring with varying frequencies suggested that a frequency o f 20 was adequate for testing purposes . With more than 60 instances of apposition , subdividing the set for testing well-defined subsets would still leave adequate numbers in the subdivisions . Also, there many more cases of appositives which affected slot fills, but could not be included in the testing because there were other source s for the slot fills elsewhere in the message . This high frequency of occurrence o f apposition in the messages suggests that it is a phenomenon which systems mus t handle in some way .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Choice of Phenomeno n", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The examples used from the test messages are all cases of noun phrases i n apposition .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Among linguists, there is variation in the liberality with which the ter m apposition is used .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "According to Quirk et -al [1] , apposition meeting the followin g three conditions is full apposition :", | |
| "cite_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 26, | |
| "end": 29, | |
| "text": "[1]", | |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF0" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "a. each of the appositives can be separately omitted without affecting th e acceptability of the sentence ; The difference between full and partial apposition in this case is trivial requirin g only the addition of a determiner to \"Rede Globo journalist\" to make the sentenc e omitting \"Carlos Marcelo\" acceptable .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Partial appositives that were omitted from th e phenomenon testing were cases of appositives containing \"also\" and \"alias .\"", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Thes e were omitted because of their adverbial nature .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Another gray area in choosing examples concerns titles . Quirk et al makes th e distinction between apposition and institutionalized titles . The authors show th e range from apposition in \"critic Paul Jones\" to full title in \"Mr . Porter\" with th e following examples : a. critic Paul Jone s the critic Paul Jones (with appositives, a preposed determiner i s normal but not with titles ) (with appositives, postpositio n more normal than prepositio n whereas the opposite i s allow postposition ) (appositives and mos t without the prope r determiners ) (most titles and some appositives can be use In the MUC-3 messages, the appositives and titles are distinguished by the test s above with the cut-off between (3) and (4) . For example, \"Colonel,\" \"Senator,\" an d \"Ambassador\" are titles because the following judgments are similar to those fo r \"Professor\" above :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Colonel Heriberto Hernandez *the Colonel Heriberto Hernandez (with titles, a preposed determiner i s not normal unless the noun phrase s are modified restrictively ) ?Heriberto Hernandez the Colonel (with titles that allow postposition , preposition without \"the\" is mor e normal than postposition with \" the \" ) the Colonel (appositives and most titles can b e used without the proper nouns an d with determiners ) Colonel (vocative) (most titles can be used as vocatives )", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "However, \"student\" and \"peasant\" are considered appositives because of th e following pattern similar to the pattern for \"critic\" above : student Mario Flore s the student Mario Flores Mario Flores the studen t the studen t ?student (vocative ) Judgments may vary .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "One possible questionable inclusion as an appositive i s the phrase \"Attorney General .\" My judgments follow :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Attorney General Roberto Garcia Alvarad o the Attorney General Roberto Garcia Alvarad o Roberto Garcia Alvarado the Attorney Genera l the Attorney Genera l Attorney General (vocative) An attempt was made to limit the appositives used in the testing to those mos t likely to be agreed upon as appositives while still maintaining a reasonable numbe r of examples .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Definition of Apposition", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The message sentences containing appositives were extracted from th e messages for analysis . The examples were put in a file for distribution to the participants to assist in analysis of their results . This file contained information concerning the categorization of the appositives and the slots affected by the appositioned noun phrases and the entire sentence .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Construction of the Test Set s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The appositives were categorized as postposed versus preposed and simpl e versus complex . An example of a postposed appositive is \"Jose Parada Grandy, th e Bolivian Police Chief\" and an example of a preposed appositive is \"Rede Glob o journalist Carlos Marcelo .\"", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Construction of the Test Set s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The subdivision of the appositives according to thei r complexity was done subjectively based on internal structure and the context . Bot h \"Jose Parada Grandy, the Bolivian Police Chief\" and \"Rede Globo journalist Carlo s Marcelo\" were considered simple . Any complexity in an example, such as conjunction within the appositive, a missing comma, or a comma inside double quotes, pu t that example in the complex category . Probably the most complex appositioned nou n phrase in the corpus was in apposition to \"peasants\" in TST2-MUC3-0036 . The misspelling \"Colonal\" is part of the message .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Construction of the Test Set s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The most important and difficult activity in constructing phenomena tests is t o determine the individual slots that could only be filled from the phrase containin g the phenomenon being tested . The slots that could only be filled by the informatio n in the appositioned noun phrases as well as in the sentences containing those appositioned noun phrases were noted . The configuration option files for the scorin g system were constructed to score just those slots directly affected by the presence o f an appositive . Slots that could have been filled from any other phrase/sentence no t containing an appositive were excluded from the scoring . This step in the test construction is the most likely point where human error can intrude .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "THE PEASANT COMMUNAL ASSOCIATION, ACC, CONTINUES TO DEMAND TH E RELEASE OF PEASANTS BARTOLO RODRIGUEZ, WHO WAS CAPTURED ON 2 7 JANUARY, AND [NAME INDISTINCT] CAPTURED ON 2 FEBRUARY B Y TROOPS OF COLONAL ORLANDO MONTANO OF THE 6TH INFANTRY BRIGADE .", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "For the purposes of running the \"minimal pair\" test, a modified version of th e message file was produced . The messages were altered to contain simple sentence s expressing the equivalence of the appositioned noun phrases in cases where th e appositioned noun phrases directly affected at least one slot in the template fill . Th e appositive no longer appeared in the original sentence . The \"minimal pair\" test was voluntary because it required a separate run o f the data extraction systems on the modified messages .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "THE PEASANT COMMUNAL ASSOCIATION, ACC, CONTINUES TO DEMAND TH E RELEASE OF PEASANTS BARTOLO RODRIGUEZ, WHO WAS CAPTURED ON 2 7 JANUARY, AND [NAME INDISTINCT] CAPTURED ON 2 FEBRUARY B Y TROOPS OF COLONAL ORLANDO MONTANO OF THE 6TH INFANTRY BRIGADE .", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The scoring of the appositive tests was diluted somewhat by the allowance i n the scoring guidelines for partial credit to be given when the key contains a complete proper name and the response contains only the identifying part of the name . It was typical of the appositioned noun phrases that they were the place where th e full name of the person was introduced with only part of the name being used fro m then on for reference . A previously undetected bug in the scoring system cause d one template not affected by apposition to be scored instead of another template tha t was affected by apposition . For phrases, only 2 slots out of a possible 66 slots (3% ) were potentially affected ; for sentences, 9 slots out of a possible 198 slots (4 .5%) were potentially affected .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "THE PEASANT COMMUNAL ASSOCIATION, ACC, CONTINUES TO DEMAND TH E RELEASE OF PEASANTS BARTOLO RODRIGUEZ, WHO WAS CAPTURED ON 2 7 JANUARY, AND [NAME INDISTINCT] CAPTURED ON 2 FEBRUARY B Y TROOPS OF COLONAL ORLANDO MONTANO OF THE 6TH INFANTRY BRIGADE .", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The intent of the testing was to discover whether the scoring isolated the phenomenon of apposition . Each of the following hypotheses was proposed and tested i n order to uncover evidence of isolation of the phenomenon . Hypothesis 1 . The systems should score differentally on the appositive s (both phrasally and sententially) than they did on the overall testing .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "HYPOTHESES", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Hypothesis 2 . The systems should score higher on the simple r appositives .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "HYPOTHESES", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Hypothesis 3 . The systems should score differently on the postpose d and preposed appositives . It was not possible to hypothesize whic h score would be higher . Although postposed appositives are more prototypical and have indications they are appositives such as comma s or dashes, preposed appositives lend themselves to treatment a s adjectives .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "HYPOTHESES", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Hypothesis 4 . The systems should score higher on their responses t o the messages where simple sentences were substituted for appositives .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "HYPOTHESES", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The recall and precision scores for the appositive tests appear in Table 1 . Tabl e 2 contains the scores based on the single measure calculated by multiplying recal l times precision .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 67, | |
| "end": 74, | |
| "text": "Table 1", | |
| "ref_id": "TABREF5" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "RESULTS", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Hypothesis 1 asserts that the apposition results are independent of the overal l performance of the systems . To determine the validity of Hypothesis 1, scatter plot s were made of overall recall versus precision scores for a test run under comparabl e conditions (Figure 1 ), the appositive scores for phrases ( Figure 2 ), and the appositiv e scores for sentences (Figure 3 ) . Comparing Figures 1 and 2 shows that the scores fo r apposition are significantly different from the overall scores .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 264, | |
| "end": 273, | |
| "text": "(Figure 1", | |
| "ref_id": "FIGREF0" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 313, | |
| "end": 321, | |
| "text": "Figure 2", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 366, | |
| "end": 375, | |
| "text": "(Figure 3", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 390, | |
| "end": 405, | |
| "text": "Figures 1 and 2", | |
| "ref_id": "FIGREF0" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Analysis of Result s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The performance b y systems on apposition is largely independent of their overall scores . The same conclusion can be drawn for the appositive scores for sentences by comparing Figures 1 and 3 ADS 0 0 1 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BBN 20 31 26 42 35 41 12 21 18 27 23 3 5 GE 32 48 22 54 48 50 20 47 27 32 7 3 GTE 2 30 3 32 0 0 2 33 3 0 0 HU 20 16 19 29 30 14 14 25 29 8 9 ITP 11 54 7 66 7 66 10 43 12 10 4 3 LSI 2 14 3 28 3 12 1 25 3 0 The recall versus precision scores for appositive phrases shows that th e performance is different from the overall performance .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 177, | |
| "end": 193, | |
| "text": "Figures 1 and 3", | |
| "ref_id": "FIGREF0" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 194, | |
| "end": 520, | |
| "text": "ADS 0 0 1 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 BBN 20 31 26 42 35 41 12 21 18 27 23 3 5 GE 32 48 22 54 48 50 20 47 27 32 7 3 GTE 2 30 3 32 0 0 2 33 3 0 0 HU 20 16 19 29 30 14 14 25 29 8 9 ITP 11 54 7 66 7 66 10 43 12 10 4 3 LSI 2 14 3 28 3 12 1 25 3 0", | |
| "ref_id": "TABREF5" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Analysis of Result s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Recal l Figure 3 :", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 8, | |
| "end": 16, | |
| "text": "Figure 3", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Recall vs Precision for Appositive Sentence s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The recall versus precision scores for appositive sentences are more lik e the scores for phrases than like the overall scores .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Recall vs Precision for Appositive Sentence s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The scatter plots for appositives scored from phrases and sentences in Figure s 2 and 3, respectively, are more comparable to each other than to the overall score s suggesting that the use of information from sentences could be a valid test of performance on a phenomenon .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 71, | |
| "end": 79, | |
| "text": "Figure s", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Recall vs Precision for Appositive Sentence s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Further analysis illustrated in Figures 4 and 5 show s that the scores for appositives and sentences containing appositives parallel each other for both recall and precision . These parallelisms affirm that material from sentences containing a phenomenon can be used for testing that phenomenon an d also indicate that we may be isolating the phenomenon .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 32, | |
| "end": 47, | |
| "text": "Figures 4 and 5", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Recall vs Precision for Appositive Sentence s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Hypothesis 2 asserts that the systems will score higher on the simple r appositives than on the more complex ones . The scores for recall are remarkabl y higher for the easy appositives as opposed to the harder appositives as shown i n Figure 6 . Figure 7 shows a less clear trend for the precision scores . The singl e measure of recall times precision, however, shows an unmistakable trend of system s scoring more highly for the easier appositives . These results give us confidence that we are isolating the phenomenon of apposition . The precision scores for appositives and sentences containin g appositives correlate with each other . The recall scores for the easy appositive phrases are generally highe r than those for the harder phrases . Sit e Figure 7 : The precision scores show a tendency to be higher for the easie r appositions . Sit e Figure : The single measure scores of recall times precision are higher for the easier appositions than for the harder ones .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 236, | |
| "end": 244, | |
| "text": "Figure 6", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 247, | |
| "end": 255, | |
| "text": "Figure 7", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 756, | |
| "end": 764, | |
| "text": "Figure 7", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 853, | |
| "end": 861, | |
| "text": "Figure :", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Recall vs Precision for Appositive Sentence s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The inability to predict whether postposed or preposed appositives would scor e higher was actually supported by the data .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Recall vs Precision for Appositive Sentence s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Hypothesis 3 was born out in that th e systems did score differently on the two types of appositives . There was no clea r trend in the results as to which kind of apposition was easier. The recall, precision , and single measure scores are shown in Figures 9 through 11 . Notice that the result s were predicted providing further evidence that the phenomenon of apposition i s being isolated . It would be interesting to look at the methods of processing the tw o types of appositives for each of the systems to see why their scores are as they are . Hypothesis 4 predicts that the systems will score higher for the message s containing simple sentences in place of the appositives . Two sites volunteered to ru n this part of the test and they both contradicted the hypothesis . Their scores are shown in Table 3 alongside their scores for the messages containing the appositione d phrases . On further analysis, it was found that the introduction of the simple sentences made the task more complex in both cases . Apparently, the appositioned nou n phrases convey the information more simply than a separate sentence containing a copula and requiring reference resolution .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 250, | |
| "end": 270, | |
| "text": "Figures 9 through 11", | |
| "ref_id": "FIGREF0" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 807, | |
| "end": 814, | |
| "text": "Table 3", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Recall vs Precision for Appositive Sentence s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The systems, for various reasons, tende d Table 3 : The recall and precision scores for the voluntary \"minimal pair\" test fo r the messages without apposition and the messages with apposition show an effect o f modifying the appositioned noun phrases .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Recall vs Precision for Appositive Sentence s", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "In summary, the systems scored differently on the appositives than they di d on the overall testing suggesting that the testing may be isolating the phenomeno n of apposition . The systems scored similarly on the slots filled from phrase s containing appositives and sentences containing appositives suggesting that information from sentences could be used to test phenomena . Because the processing o f apposition can affect the processing of the entire sentence, the parallel results i n these scores further suggests that the phenomenon of apposition is being isolated . The systems scored markedly higher on the simpler appositives as opposed to th e more complex ones . These results are perhaps the strongest evidence that it is possible to isolate the phenomenon of apposition by scoring slot fills . The system s scored differently on the postposed and preposed appositives . It would be interestin g to look at the methods employed by each system with respect to these classes o f appositives . It was predicted that neither class would be clearly easier . The fact that this prediction was correct provides strong support for the claim that apposition i s being isolated . The systems scored lower on their responses to the messages where simple sentences were substituted for appositives . The effect on the scores, althoug h unexpected, still supports the isolatability of apposition . In some of the more welldefined trends, the anomalies noticed are often for the lower scoring systems . However, the systems are scoring highly enough overall at this stage of developmen t for the phenomena scores to be meaningful . In conclusion, there are strong indications that the phenomenon of apposition has been isolated by the testing and tha t performance on apposition can be scored using the MUC-3 scoring system .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "CONCLUSION S", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Further work in phenomena testing should now be focused on carefull y developing a representative selection of phenomena tests for the messages . Th e evaluation of data extraction systems can be enhanced by determining performanc e of the systems on these linguistic phenomena . Phenomena testing should be done a t various linguistic levels including the word level, phrase level, sentence level , intersententially, and the level of discourse .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Further Researc h", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Testing according to the linguisti c characteristics of the messages would encourage the data extraction systems t o improve capabilities applicable to other domains .", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Further Researc h", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "The papers in this section were prepared by each of the fifteen sites that completed the MUC-3 evaluation . The papers are intended to provide the reade r with some context for interpreting the test results, which are presented more full y in appendices F and G of the proceedings . The sites were asked to comment on the following aspects of their MUC-3 experience : *", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "PART II : TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS (SITE REPORTS )", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Explanation of test settings (precision/recall/overgeneration ) and how these settings were chose n * Where bulk of effort was spent, and how much time was spen t overall .on MUC-3 * What the limiting factor was (time, people, CPU cycles , knowledge, . . . ) * How the training of the system was don e -What proportion of the training data was used (and how ) Whether/Why/How the system improved over time, an d how much of the training was automate d ", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "PART II : TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSIS (SITE REPORTS )", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "back_matter": [], | |
| "bib_entries": { | |
| "BIBREF0": { | |
| "ref_id": "b0", | |
| "title": "A Grammar of Contemporary English", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "R", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Quirk", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "S", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Greenbaum", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "G", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Leech", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "J", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Svartvik", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1984, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Quirk, R ., Greenbaum, S ., Leech, G ., and Svartvik, J ., A Grammar of Contemporary English (London : Longman Group Limited, 1984) .", | |
| "links": null | |
| } | |
| }, | |
| "ref_entries": { | |
| "FIGREF0": { | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "uris": null, | |
| "text": "A scatter plot shows the scores for overall recall versus precision in a test run under comparable conditions .Recall vs Precision for Appositive s.", | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "FIGREF1": { | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "uris": null, | |
| "text": "Figure 2 : The recall versus precision scores for appositive phrases shows that th e performance is different from the overall performance .", | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "FIGREF2": { | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "uris": null, | |
| "text": "The recall scores for appositives and sentences containing appositive s correlate with each other . App & App-Sen Precision n-App Prec Sen Pre c", | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "FIGREF3": { | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "uris": null, | |
| "text": "Figure 5 : The precision scores for appositives and sentences containin g appositives correlate with each other .", | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "FIGREF4": { | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "uris": null, | |
| "text": "Figure : The recall scores for the easy appositive phrases are generally highe r than those for the harder phrases .", | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "FIGREF8": { | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "uris": null, | |
| "text": "The recall scores for postposed and preposed appositives show difference s in the scores but no clear trend as to which is easier to process .", | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "FIGREF9": { | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "uris": null, | |
| "text": "The precision scores for postposed and preposed appositives sho w differences in the scores but no clear indication as to which is easier to process .App-Post & App-Pre R X The single measure of recall times precision for postposed and prepose d appositives shows that the systems score differently on the two but neither i s consistently easier .", | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "TABREF0": { | |
| "type_str": "table", | |
| "text": "VEHICLE AND PLACED A PACKAGE IN ONE OF THE PLANT POTS ON JUAN DE LA RIVA STREET, A FEW METERS FROM THE U .S . EMBASSY I N DOWNTOWN LA PAZ . THE BOLIVIAN POLICE CHIEF TOLD EFE THAT AN UNIDENTIFIED PERSO N STEPPED OUT OF A VEHICLE AND PLACED A PACKAGE IN ONE OF THE PLAN T POTS ON JUAN DE LA RIVA STREET, A FEW METERS FROM THE U .S . EMBASSY IN DOWNTOWN LA PAZ .", | |
| "content": "<table><tr><td colspan=\"2\">JOSE PARADA GRANDY TOLD EFE THAT AN UNIDENTIFIED PERSON STEPPE D</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">OUT OF A Partial apposition occurs when the three conditions are not all met . An</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">example of partial apposition not meeting condition (a) appears in test message TST2 -</td></tr><tr><td>MUC3-0100 .</td><td/></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">THE BRAZILIAN EMBASSY IN COLOMBIA HAS CONFIRMED THE RELEASE O F</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">REDE GLOBO JOURNALIST CARLOS MARCELO WHO WAS KIDNAPPED B Y</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">COLOMBIAN ARMY OF NATIONAL LIBERATION GUERRILLAS .</td></tr><tr><td>b.</td><td>each fulfills the same syntactic function in the resultant sentence ; an d</td></tr><tr><td>c.</td><td>there is no difference between the original sentence and either of th e</td></tr><tr><td/><td>resultant sentences in extralinguistic reference .</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">An example of full apposition is the following from test message TST2-MUC3 -</td></tr><tr><td>0004 .</td><td/></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">JOSE PARADA GRANDY, THE BOLIVIAN POLICE CHIEF, TOLD EFE THAT A N</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">UNIDENTIFIED PERSON STEPPED OUT OF A VEHICLE AND PLACED A</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">PACKAGE IN ONE OF THE PLANT POTS ON JUAN DE LA RIVA STREET, A FE W</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">METERS FROM THE U.S . EMBASSY IN DOWNTOWN LA PAZ .</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">\"Jose Parada Grandy\" and \"the Bolivian Police Chief\" are in full appositio n</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">because they each can be omitted resulting in the following acceptable sentences ,</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">they each are the subject in those sentences, and all three sentences have the sam e</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">extralinguistic reference .</td></tr></table>", | |
| "html": null, | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "TABREF2": { | |
| "type_str": "table", | |
| "text": "For example , THE BRAZILIAN EMBASSY IN COLOMBIA HAS CONFIRMED THE RELEASE O F REDE GLOBO JOURNALIST CARLOS MARCELO WHO WAS KIDNAPPED B Y COLOMBIAN ARMY OF NATIONAL LIBERATION GUERRILLAS . was replaced b y THE BRAZILIAN EMBASSY IN COLOMBIA HAS CONFIRMED THE RELEASE O F CARLOS MARCELO WHO WAS KIDNAPPED BY COLOMBIAN ARMY O F NATIONAL LIBERATION GUERRILLAS . CARLOS MARCELO IS A REDE GLOB O JOURNALIST .", | |
| "content": "<table/>", | |
| "html": null, | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "TABREF5": { | |
| "type_str": "table", | |
| "text": "The sites reported recall and precision scores for the appositive phrases , the sentences containing appositives, the easy and hard appositives, and the postposed and preposed appositives .", | |
| "content": "<table><tr><td/><td colspan=\"3\">Single Appositive Measure s</td><td/></tr><tr><td>Site</td><td>EasyRXP</td><td>HardRXP</td><td>PostRXP</td><td>PreRX P</td></tr><tr><td>ADS</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>BBN</td><td>1435</td><td>252</td><td>486</td><td>80</td></tr><tr><td>GE</td><td>2500</td><td>940</td><td>1008</td><td>233</td></tr><tr><td>Cit'E</td><td>0</td><td>66</td><td>99</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>HU</td><td>420</td><td>350</td><td>667</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>ITP</td><td>462</td><td>430</td><td>804</td><td>43</td></tr><tr><td>LSI</td><td>36</td><td>25</td><td>99</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>MDC</td><td>836</td><td>432</td><td>702</td><td>52</td></tr><tr><td>NYU</td><td>3234</td><td>1300</td><td>1150</td><td>310</td></tr><tr><td>PRC</td><td>1140</td><td>25</td><td>804</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>SRI</td><td>2030</td><td>1273</td><td>1482</td><td>161</td></tr><tr><td>SYN</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>UM</td><td>5712</td><td>2272</td><td>3060</td><td>368</td></tr><tr><td>UN</td><td>50</td><td>50</td><td>100</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>UNI</td><td>1728</td><td>126</td><td>630</td><td>66</td></tr></table>", | |
| "html": null, | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "TABREF6": { | |
| "type_str": "table", | |
| "text": "The single measure scores were calculated for comparing easy versus har d and postposed versus preposed appositives .", | |
| "content": "<table/>", | |
| "html": null, | |
| "num": null | |
| }, | |
| "TABREF7": { | |
| "type_str": "table", | |
| "text": "not to use the information in the separate sentence . The recall scores are thu s lower . The precision scores are somewhat affected . The results show an explanable effect on the scores lending further credence to the claim that the appositio n phenomena is being isolated .", | |
| "content": "<table><tr><td/><td/><td>VOLUNTARY</td><td/><td/></tr><tr><td>Site</td><td>Recall</td><td>Precision</td><td>App R</td><td>App P</td></tr><tr><td>NYU</td><td>28</td><td>53</td><td>32</td><td>6 2</td></tr><tr><td>UMASS</td><td>3 8</td><td>6 8</td><td>4 3</td><td>7 7</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"3\">1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910111213141 5</td><td/><td/></tr><tr><td/><td>Site</td><td/><td/><td/></tr><tr><td/><td/><td/><td/><td>Post RX P</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td/><td/><td>D-Pre R X P</td></tr></table>", | |
| "html": null, | |
| "num": null | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } |