Experiments in PCFG-like Disambiguation of Constituency Parse Forests for Polish

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9561)


The work presented here is the first attempt at creating a probabilistic constituency parser for Polish. The described algorithm disambiguates parse forests obtained from the Świgra parser in a manner close to Probabilistic Context Free Grammars. The experiment was carried out and evaluated on the Składnica treebank. The idea behind the experiment was to check what can be achieved with this well known method. Results are promising, the approach presented achieves up to \(94.1\,\%\) PARSEVAL F-measure and \(92.1\,\%\) ULAS. The PCFG-like algorithm can be evaluated against existing Polish dependency parser which achieves \(92.2\,\%\) ULAS.


  1. Abney, S., Flickenger, S., Gdaniec, C., Grishman, C., Harrison, P., Hindle, D., Ingria, R., Jelinek, F., Klavans, J., Liberman, M., Marcus, M., Roukos, S., Santorini, B., Strzalkowski, T.: Procedure for quantitatively comparing the syntactic coverage of english grammars. In: Black, E. (ed.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Speech and Natural Language, HLT 1991. Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg (1991)Google Scholar
  2. Billot, S., Lang, B.: The structure of shared forests in ambiguous parsing. In: Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (1989)Google Scholar
  3. Collins, M.: Three generative, lexicalised models for statistical parsing. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and Eighth Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL 1998. Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg (1997)Google Scholar
  4. Pereira, F., Warren, D.H.D.: Definite clause grammars for language analysis-a survey of the formalism and a comparison with augmented transition networks. Artif. Intell. 13, 231–278 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Przepiórkowski, A.: On complements and adjuncts in Polish. In: Borsley, R.D., Przepiórkowski, A. (eds.) Slavic in HPSG, pp. 183–210. CSLI Publications, Stanford (1999)Google Scholar
  6. Świdziński, M., Woliński, M.: Towards a bank of constituent parse trees for Polish. In: Sojka, P., Horák, A., Kopeček, I., Pala, K. (eds.) TSD 2010. LNCS, vol. 6231, pp. 197–204. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Vater, H.: On the possibility of distinguishing between complements and adjuncts. In: Abraham, W. (ed.) Valence, Semantic Case and Grammatical Relations. Studies in Language Companion Series (SLCS), vol. 1, pp. 21–45. John Benjamins, Amsterdam (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Woliński, M., Głowińska, K., Świdziński, M.: A preliminary version of Składnica–a treebank of Polish. In: Vetulani, Z. (ed.) Proceedings of the 5th Language & Technology Conference, Poznań (2011)Google Scholar
  9. Wróblewska, A., Woliński, M.: Preliminary experiments in Polish dependency parsing. In: Bouvry, P., Kłopotek, M.A., Leprévost, F., Marciniak, M., Mykowiecka, A., Rybiński, H. (eds.) SIIS 2011. LNCS, vol. 7053, pp. 279–292. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Computer Science, Polish Academy of SciencesWarszawaPoland

Personalised recommendations