Research on Language and Computation

, Volume 4, Issue 1, pp 39–75 | Cite as

Efficient Realization of Coordinate Structures in Combinatory Categorial Grammar

  • Michael White
Article

Abstract

We describe a chart realization algorithm for Combinatory Categorial Grammar (CCG), and show how it can be used to efficiently realize a wide range of coordination phenomena, including argument cluster coordination and gapping. The algorithm incorporates three novel methods for improving the efficiency of chart realization: (i) using rules to chunk the input logical form into sub-problems to be solved independently prior to further combination; (ii) pruning edges from the chart based on the n-gram score of the edge’s string, in comparison to other edges with equivalent categories; and (iii) formulating the search as a best-first anytime algorithm, using n-gram scores to sort the edges on the agenda. The algorithm has been implemented as an extension to the OpenCCG open source CCG parser, and initial performance tests indicate that the realizer is fast enough for practical use in natural language dialogue systems.

Keywords

Combinatory Categorial Grammar computational semantics natural language generation surface realization 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baldridge J. (2002) Lexically Specified Derivational Control in Combinatory Categorial Grammar. Ph.D. thesis, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  2. Baldridge J., Kruijff G.-J. (2002) Coupling CCG and Hybrid Logic Dependency Semantics. In of 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 319–326.Google Scholar
  3. Baldridge J., Kruijff G.-J. (2003) Multi-Modal Combinatory Categorial Grammar. In of 10thal Meeting of the European Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  4. Blackburn P. (2000) Representation, Reasoning, and Relational Structures: a Hybrid Logic Manifesto. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 8/3, 339–625.Google Scholar
  5. Carroll J., Copestake A., Flickinger D., Poznański V. (1999) An Efficient Chart Generator for (Semi-) Lexicalist Grammars. In Proceedings of the 7th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, pp. 86–95.Google Scholar
  6. Copestake A., Lascarides A., Flickinger D. (2001) An Algebra for Semantic Construction in Constraint-based Grammars. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the of Computational Linguistics, pp. 132–139.Google Scholar
  7. Dalianis H. (1996) Concise Natural Language Generation from Formal Specifications. PhD. thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  8. den Os E., Boves L. (2003) Towards Ambient Intelligence: Multimodal Computers that Understand our Intentions. In Proceedings of eChallenges e-2003.Google Scholar
  9. Elhadad M., Robin J. (1998) SURGE: A Comprehensive Plug-in Syntactic Realization Component for Text Generation. http://www.cs.bgu.ac.il/surge/.Google Scholar
  10. Foster M.E., White M. (2004) Techniques for Text Planning with XSLT. In Proceedings of NLPXML-2004.Google Scholar
  11. Geach P. (1972) A Program for Syntax. In Davidson D., Harman G. (eds). Semantics of Natural Language. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 483–497Google Scholar
  12. Geurts B. (2002) Specific Indefinites, Presupposition and Scope. In Bäuerle R., Reyle U., Zimmerman T.E. (eds). Presuppositions and Discourse. Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Hockenmaier J., Steedman M. (2002) Acquiring Compact Lexicalized Grammars from a Cleaner Treebank. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation.Google Scholar
  14. Hoffman B. (1995) Computational Analysis of the Syntax and Interpretation of ‘Free’ Word-order in Turkish. PhD. thesis, University of Pennsylvania. IRCS Report 95–17.Google Scholar
  15. Kamp H., Reyle U. (1993) From Discourse to Logic. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  16. Kay M. (1996) Chart Generation. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. pp. 200–204.Google Scholar
  17. Kruijff G.-J.M. (2001) A Categorial Modal Architecture of Informativity: Dependency Grammar Logic & Information Structure. PhD. thesis, Charles University.Google Scholar
  18. Kruijff G.-J.M. (2003) Binding Across Boundaries. In Kruijff G.-J. M., Oehrle R.T. (eds.), Resource-Sensitivity in Binding and Anaphora. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 123–158.Google Scholar
  19. Langkilde I., Knight K. (1998) The Practical Value of n-grams in Generation. In Procedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Natural Language Generation.Google Scholar
  20. Langkilde-Geary I. (2002) An Empirical Verification of Coverage and Correctness for a - Sentence Generator. In Proceedings of the Second International Natural Language Generation Conference.Google Scholar
  21. Lavoie B., Rambow O. (1997) RealPro – A Fast, Portable Sentence Realizer. In Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing.Google Scholar
  22. Malouf R., Carroll J., Copestake A. (2000) Efficient Feature Structure Operations Without Compilation. Natural Language Engineering 6/1, pp. 29–46.Google Scholar
  23. Moore J., Foster M. E., Lemon O., White M. (2004) Generating Tailored, Comparative Descriptions in Spoken Dialogue. In Proceedings of FLAIRS-04.Google Scholar
  24. Moore R.C. (1989) Unification-based Semantic Interpretation. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 33–41.Google Scholar
  25. Moore R.C. (2002) A Complete, Efficient Sentence-Realization Algorithm for Unification Grammar. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Natural Language Generation.Google Scholar
  26. Muskens R. (1996) Combining Montague Semantics and Discourse Representations. and Philosphy 19/2, 143–186.Google Scholar
  27. Papineni K., Roukos S., Ward T., Zhu W.-J. (2001) Bleu: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation. Technical Report RC22176, IBM.Google Scholar
  28. Prevost S. (1995) A Semantics of Contrast and Information Structure for Specifying Intonation in Spoken Language Generation. PhD. thesis, University of Pennsylvania. IRCS TR 96–01.Google Scholar
  29. Shaw J. (1998) Clause Aggregation Using Linguistic Knowledge. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, pp. 138–148.Google Scholar
  30. Shemtov H. (1997) Ambiguity Management in Natural Language Generation. PhD. thesis, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  31. Shieber S. (1988) A Uniform Architecture for Parsing and Generation. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 614–619.Google Scholar
  32. Shieber S., van Nord G., Pereira F., Moore R. (1990) Semantic-head–driven generation. Computational Linguistics 16/1, 30–42.Google Scholar
  33. Steedman M. (1999) Quantifier Scope Alternation in CCG. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 301–308.Google Scholar
  34. Steedman M. (2000a) Information Structure and the Syntax-Phonology Interface. Linguistic Inquiry, 31/4, 649–689.Google Scholar
  35. Steedman M. (2000b) The Syntactic Process. MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  36. Steedman M. (2003) Scope Alternation and the Syntax/Semantics Interface. Manuscript, draft 4.1.Google Scholar
  37. Stolcke A. (2002) SRILM – An Extensible Language Modeling Toolkit. In Proceedings of ICSLP-02.Google Scholar
  38. Varges S., Mellish C. (2001) Instance-based Natural Language Generation. In Proceedings of the 2nd Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
  39. White M. (2004) Reining in CCG Chart Realization. In Proceedings of the Third International Natural Language Generation Conference.Google Scholar
  40. White M., Baldridge J. (2003) Adapting Chart Realization to CCG. In Proceedings of the 9th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael White
    • 1
  1. 1.School of InformaticsUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations