Advertisement

Engineering of IE Systems: An Object-Oriented Approach

  • Roberto Basili
  • Massimo Di Nanni
  • Maria Teresa Pazienza
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1714)

Abstract

In order to design complex, effective and adaptable NLP systems a methodology able to satisfy two traditionally conflicting requirements in software engineering, i.e (linguistic) expressiveness and robustness, is necessary. By combining NLP methodologies and Language Engineering (LE) methods with Software Engineering (SE) criteria, we propose a software infrastructure able to optimize the design and development of complex IE applications. The basic idea is to embed within the software infrastructure itself a suitable linguistic description and make available at a computational level relevant portions of the linguistic abstraction required by a variety of applications.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Tipster text program phases i & ii. In Proceedings of Workshops sponsored by the ARPA TIPSTER Program for Advances in Text Processing. Morgan-Kaufmann Publishers, 1996.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Basili, De Rossi G., and Pazienza M.T. Inducing terminology for lexical acquisition. In Preoceedings of the Second Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Providence, USA, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Basili, Bonelli A. and Pazienza M.T. Estrazione e Rappresentazione di Informazioni terminologiche eterogenee In Proceedings of the Workshop “Strumenti di Organizzazione ed Accesso Intelligent per Informazioni Eterogenee” of the AI*IA’ 98 Conference, Padova, September 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Basili, Di Nanni M., Mazzucchelli L., Marabello M.V., and Pazienza M.T. Nlp for text classification: the trevi experience. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Industrial Applications, Universite’ de Moncton, New Brunswick (Canada), August 1998.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Basili, Catizone R., Pazienza M.T., Stevenson M., Velardi P., Vindigni M., and aiWilks Y. An empirical approach to lexical tuning. In Proceedings of the Workshop “Adapting Lexical and Corpus Resources to Sublanguages and Applications”, LREC First International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Granada, Spain, 26 May 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. Basili, Pazienza M. T., and Velardi P. n empirical symbolic approach to natural language processing. Artificial Intelligence, (85):59–99, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. Beckwith, Fellbaum C., Gross D., and Miller G. Wordnet: a lexical database organized on a psycholinguistic principles. In U. Zernik, editor, Lexical Acquisition: Exploiting On-Line Resources to Build a Lexicon. Lawrence-Erlbaum Ass, 1991.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    E. Brill and P. Resnik. A rule based approach to prepositional phrase attachment disambiguation. In Proc. of COLING-94, Kyoto, Japan, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Cunningham, Humphreys K., Gaizauskas R., and Wilks Y. Software infrastructure for natural language processing. In Proceedings of Fifth Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, Washington, DC, USA. Morgan-Kaufmann Publishers, March-April, 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Gaizauskas, Humphreys K., Cunningham H., and Wilks Y. Description of LaSIE system as used for MUC-6. In G. Booch, editor, Proceedings of the 6th Message Understanding Conference, MUC-6. Morgan Kaufmann, 1995.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Gamma, Helm R., Johnson R., Vlissides J., and Booch G. Design patterns: Elements of reusable object-oriented software. Addison-Wesley Professional Computing, October 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Grishman and Sterling J. Generalizing automatically generated selectional patterns. In Proc. of COLING-94, Kyoto, Japan, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. Hindle and M. Rooths. Structural ambiguity and lexical relation. Computational Linguistics, 19(1), 1993.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. Mazzucchelli and Marabello M.V. Specification of the overall toolkit architecture. In EP 23311 TREVI Project Deliverable 7D1, 1997.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. McKelvie, Brew C., and Thompson H. Using SGML as a basis for data-intensive NLP. In Proceedings of Fifth Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing. ACL, WashinGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roberto Basili
    • 1
  • Massimo Di Nanni
    • 1
  • Maria Teresa Pazienza
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science, Systems and ProductionUniversity of Rome Tor VergataRomaItaly

Personalised recommendations