Advertisement

Parsing as semantically guided constraint solving: the role of ontologies

  • Veronica Dahl
  • Sergio TessarisEmail author
  • Mariano De Sousa Bispo
Article
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

In the Parsing-as-Constraint-Solving model of language processing, grammar syntax is described modularly through independent constraints among direct constituents of a phrase - constraints such as: “in verb phrases, a verb must precede its complements”, or “in noun phrases, a noun requires a determiner”. Parsing reduces to verifying the constraints relevant to an input phrase, but instead of the typical hierarchical (i.e., parse tree) representations of a successful parse (and also typical complete silence upon unsuccessful parses), the main result is a list of satisfied constraints, and if the input is not totally conforming, also a list of unsatisfied constraints. The latter can serve various purposes beyond plain parsing, such as guiding the correction of any imperfections found in the input- and we can still construct a parse tree if needed, as a side effect. While almost purely syntax-based, the Parsing-as-Constraint-Solving model lends itself well to accommodating interactions with other levels of analysis. These however have been little explored. In this position paper we discuss how to extend this model to incorporate semantic information, in particular from ontologies, and with particular guidance from unsatisfied constraints. This departs from more typical constraint-solving schemes, where failed constraints are simply listed and do not actively contribute to the parse. By giving failed constraints a more active role, we can arrive at more precise analyses and at more appropriate corrections of flawed input. Because even not totally conforming sentences can be more precisely parsed, we gain in expressivity with respect to both the classical, strictly stratified approach to NLP, and the less precise and less reliable statistically-based methods.

Keywords

Robust parsing Incorrect or incomplete queries Womb grammars Ontologies Constraint-based parsing Failure-driven parsing Compositional semantics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Veronica Dahl is thankful for the support provided for this work by NSERC’s Discovery grant 31611024. Mariano De Sousa Bispo wishes to thank the government of Canada and in particular Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada for the support that made this work possible, in the form of his scholarship within the Emerging Leaders in the America’s program. Thanks are also due to Saskia Wolsak for pointing us to Turner’s work on ethnobotany, and to the anonymous referees, for their very useful comments in a first draft of this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Adebara, I.: Using womb grammars for inducing the grammar of a subset of Yoruba noun phrases. TRIANGLE, vol 14, (ISSN 2013-939X) (2018)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adebara, I., Dahl, V.: Grammar induction as automated transformation between constraint solving models of language. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Knowledge-Based Techniques for Problem Solving and Reasoning Co-located with 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2016), New York City, USA, July 10, 2016 (2016). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1648/paper6.pdf
  3. 3.
    Adebara, I., Dahl, V., Tessaris, S.: Completing mixed language grammars through womb grammars plus ontologies. In: Henning Christiansen, M.D.J.L., Loukanova, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Workshop on Partiality, Underspecification and Natural Language Processing, pp. 32–40 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Becerra, L., Dahl, V., Miralles, E.: On second language tutoring through womb grammars. In: IWANN 2013, June 12–14, Tenerife, Spain (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Becerra, L., Dahl, V., Jiménez-López, M.D.: Womb grammars as a bio-inspired model for grammar induction. In: Trends in Practical Applications of Heterogeneous Multi-agent Systems. The PAAMS Collection, pp. 79–86. Springer International Publishing (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blache, P.: Property grammars: a fully constraint-based theory. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Constraint Solving and Language Processing, CSLP’04.  https://doi.org/10.1007/11424574_1, pp 1–16. Springer, Berlin (2005)
  7. 7.
    Blache, P., Morawietz, F.: A non-generative constraint-based formalism. Travaux Interdisciplinaires du Laboratoire Parole et Langage d’Aix-en-Provence (TIPA) 19, 11–26. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00283724. Autorisation No.1123 : <BR />TIPA est la revue du Laboratoire Parole et Langage (2000)
  8. 8.
    Christiansen, H.: CHR grammars. TPLP 5(4–5), 467–501 (2005)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clark, M., Kim, Y., Kruschwitz, U., Song, D., Albakour, D., Dignum, S., Beresi, U.C., Fasli, M., De Roeck, A.: Automatically structuring domain knowledge from text: an overview of current research. Inf. Process. Manag. 48(3), 552–568 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dahl, V., Blache, P.: Directly executable constraint based grammars. In: Proceedings of Journees Francophones de Programmation en Logique avec Contraintes (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dahl, V., Gu, B.: A CHRG analysis of ambiguity in biological texts. In: Proceedings of Fourth International Workshop on Constraints and Language Processing (CSLP) (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dahl, V., Miralles, J.E.: Womb grammars: constraint solving for grammar induction. In: Sneyers, J., Frühwirth, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Constraint Handling Rules, vol. Technical Report CW 624, pp 32–40. Department of Computer Science, K.U. Leuven (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dahl, V., Miralles, E., Becerra, L.: On language acquisition through womb grammars. In: 7th International Workshop on Constraint Solving and Language Processing, pp 99–105 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dahl, V., Egilmez, S., Martins, J., Miralles, J.E.: On failure-driven constraint-based parsing through chrg?. In: CHR 2013–Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Constraint Handling Rules, p 13 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dahl, V., Gu, B., Miralles, E.: Semantic properties in constraint-based grammars. In: Blache, P., Christiansen, H., Dahl, V., Duchier, D., Villadsen, J.E. (eds.). Constraints and Language (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Duchier, D., Dao, T.B.H., Parmentier, Y.: Model-Theory and Implementation of Property Grammars with Features. Journal of Logic and Computation, Oxford University Press (OUP) 24(2), 491–509 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Foth, K., Daum, M., Menzel, W.: Parsing unrestricted german text with defeasible constraints. In: Christiansen, H., Skadhauge, P., Villadsen, J. (eds.) Constraint Solving and Language Processing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3438.  https://doi.org/10.1007/11424574_9, pp 140–157. Springer, Berlin (2005)
  18. 18.
    Frühwirth, T.W.: Theory and practice of constraint handling rules. J. Log. Program. 37(1–3), 95–138 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gottlob, G.: Computer science as the continuation of logic by other means. http://www.informatics-europe.org/ecss/ecss-2009/conference-program.html. Keynote at European Computing Summit Sciences 2009, Paris (2009)
  20. 20.
    Gupta, A., Oates, T.: Using ontologies and the web to learn lexical semantics. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence, IJCAI’07, pp 1618–1623. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (2007). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1625275.1625537
  21. 21.
    Ritchie, G.: The Linguistic Analysis of Jokes. Routledge, Evanston (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Snow, R., Jurafsky, D., Ng, A.Y.: Semantic taxonomy induction from heterogenous evidence. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL-44.  https://doi.org/10.3115/1220175.1220276, pp 801–808. Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg (2006)
  23. 23.
    Turner, N.: Ancient Pathways, Ancestral Knowledge: Ethnobotany and Ecological Wisdom of Indigenous Peoples of Northwestern North America. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    van Rullen, T.: Vers une analyse syntaxique a granularite variable. Ph.D. thesis, Université de Provence (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vossen, P.: Eurowordnet: a multilingual database of autonomous and language-specific wordnets connected via an inter-lingualindex. Int. J. Lexicogr. 17 (2), 161–173 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/17.2.161 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Veronica Dahl
    • 1
  • Sergio Tessaris
    • 2
    Email author
  • Mariano De Sousa Bispo
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Simon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada
  2. 2.Free University of Bozen–BolzanoBolzanoItaly
  3. 3.University of Buenos AiresBuenos AiresArgentina

Personalised recommendations