Advertisement

A Rule-Based AMR Parser for Portuguese

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11238)

Abstract

Semantic parsers help to better understand a language and may produce better computer systems. They map natural language statements into meaning representations. Abstract Meaning Representation (AMR) is a new semantic representation designed to capture the meaning of a sentence, representing it as a single rooted acyclic directed graph with labeled nodes (concepts) and edged (relations) among them. Although it is receiving growing attention in the Natural Language Processing community, most of the works have focused on the English language due to the lack of large annotated corpora for other languages. Thus, the task of developing parsers becomes difficult, producing a gap between English and other languages. In this paper, we introduce an approach for a rule-based parser with generic rules in order to overcome this gap. We evaluate the parser on a manually annotated corpus in Portuguese, achieving promising results and outperforming one of the current parser development strategies in the area.

Keywords

Abstract Meaning Representation Semantic parsing Portuguese language 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to FAPESP and IFPI for supporting this work.

References

  1. 1.
    Abend, O., Rappoport, A.: The state of the art in semantic representation. In: Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 77–89 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anchiêta, R.T., Pardo, T.A.S.: Towards AMR-BR: a semBank for Brazilian Portuguese. In: Proceedings of the 11th Edition of the Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, pp. 974–979 (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banarescu, L., et al.: Abstract meaning representation for sembanking. In: Proceedings of the 7th Linguistic Annotation Workshop and Interoperability with Discourse, pp. 178–186 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bick, E.: The Parsing System “Palavras”: Automatic Grammatical Analysis of Portuguese in a Constraint Grammar Framework. Aarhus Universitetsforlag, Aarhus (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blanco, E., Moldovan, D.: Semantic representation of negation using focus detection. In: Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, vol. 1, pp. 581–589. Association for Computational Linguistics (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bos, J.: Expressive power of abstract meaning representations. Comput. Linguist. 42, 527–535 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Burns, G.A., Hermjakob, U., Ambite, J.L.: Abstract meaning representations as linked data. In: Groth, P., Simperl, E., Gray, A., Sabou, M., Krötzsch, M., Lecue, F., Flöck, F., Gil, Y. (eds.) ISWC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9982, pp. 12–20. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46547-0_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cai, S., Knight, K.: Smatch: an evaluation metric for semantic feature structures. In: Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers), pp. 748–752 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Damonte, M., Cohen, S.B.: Cross-lingual abstract meaning representation parsing. In: Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics - Human Language Technologies, pp. 1146–1155 (2018)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Damonte, M., Cohen, S.B., Satta, G.: An incremental parser for abstract meaning representation. In: Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 1, Long Papers, pp. 536–546 (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Flanigan, J., Thomson, S., Carbonell, J.G., Dyer, C., Smith, N.A.: A discriminative graph-based parser for the abstract meaning representation. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 1426–1436 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goodman, J., Vlachos, A., Naradowsky, J.: Noise reduction and targeted exploration in imitation learning for abstract meaning representation parsing. In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), vol. 1, pp. 1–11 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hartmann, N.S., Duran, M.S., Aluísio, S.M.: Automatic semantic role labeling on non-revised syntactic trees of journalistic texts. In: Silva, J., Ribeiro, R., Quaresma, P., Adami, A., Branco, A. (eds.) PROPOR 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9727, pp. 202–212. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41552-9_20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jurafsky, D., Martin, J.: Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics and Speech Recognition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kingsbury, P., Palmer, M.: From Treebank to Propbank. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 1989–1993 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lehmann, F.: Semantic Networks in Artificial Intelligence. Elsevier Science Inc., Amsterdam (1992)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu, F., Flanigan, J., Thomson, S., Sadeh, N., Smith, N.A.: Toward abstractive summarization using semantic representations. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pp. 1077–1086 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Matthiessen, C., Bateman, J.A.: Text Generation and Systemic-functional Linguistics: Experiences from English and Japanese. Pinter Publishers, London (1991)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    McDonald, R., Pereira, F., Ribarov, K., Hajič, J.: Non-projective dependency parsing using spanning tree algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 523–530 (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mitra, A., Baral, C.: Addressing a question answering challenge by combining statistical methods with inductive rule learning and reasoning. In: Proceedings of the 30th Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 2779–2785 (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nivre, J.: Incrementality in deterministic dependency parsing. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Incremental Parsing: Bringing Engineering and Cognition Together, pp. 50–57 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Palmer, M., Gildea, D., Kingsbury, P.: The proposition bank: an annotated corpus of semantic roles. Comput. Linguist. 31(1), 71–106 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pan, X., Cassidy, T., Hermjakob, U., Ji, H., Knight, K.: Unsupervised entity linking with abstract meaning representation. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pp. 1130–1139 (2015)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Peng, X., Song, L., Gildea, D.: A synchronous hyperedge replacement grammar based approach for AMR parsing. In: Conference on Computational Language Learning, pp. 32–41 (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pourdamghani, N., Knight, K., Hermjakob, U.: Generating English from abstract meaning representations. In: International Conference on Natural Language Generation, pp. 21–25 (2016)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Song, L., Peng, X., Zhang, Y., Wang, Z., Gildea, D.: AMR-to-text generation with synchronous node replacement grammar. In: Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers), pp. 7–13 (2017)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Speer, R., Havasi, C.: Representing general relational knowledge in ConceptNet 5. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 3679–3686 (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Uchida, H., Zhu, M., Della Senta, T.: UNL: Universal Networking Language-an Electronic Language for Communication, Understanding, and Collaboration. UNU/IAS/UNL Center, Tokyo (1996)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vanderwende, L.: NLPwin-an introduction. Technical report, Microsoft Research tech report no. MSR-TR-2015-23 (2015)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vanderwende, L., Menezes, A., Quirk, C.: An AMR parser for English, French, German, Spanish and Japanese and a new AMR-annotated corpus. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics - Human Language Technologies, pp. 26–30 (2015)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wang, C., Xue, N., Pradhan, S.: Boosting transition-based AMR parsing with refined actions and auxiliary analyzers. In: Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 2: Short Papers), pp. 857–862 (2015)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang, C., Xue, N., Pradhan, S., Pradhan, S.: A transition-based algorithm for AMR parsing. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pp. 366–375 (2015)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zhou, J., Xu, F., Uszkoreit, H., Qu, W., Li, R., Gu, Y.: AMR parsing with an incremental joint model. In: Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 680–689 (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interinstitutional Center for Computational Linguistics (NILC), Institute of Mathematical and Computer SciencesUniversity of São PauloSão CarlosBrazil

Personalised recommendations