[developers] tsdb result file
bart.cramer at gmail.com
Tue Dec 2 14:11:20 CET 2008
Stephen: it happened with cheap, either in -tsdbdump or in slave form,
both with GG and my own grammar.
> 1. Roots show up inconsistently in items parsed with cheap (we
> never figured out why they do or do not show up)
Indeed. Variation is both between and within test items.
Another thing: lately I committed a fix for ticket 23:
https://pet.opendfki.de/ticket/23. It solves the incorrect output of
i-length when PET is used in -tsdbdump mode. Before, it was off by 1
compared to normal input of a test items file in the tsdb podium. If
you use this field in this setting, please check whether it gives
correct output to you.
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Stephan Oepen <oe at ifi.uio.no> wrote:
> hi bart,
>> I was looking at the result file in tsdb profiles, and I saw that in
>> some parses the root condition is included in the parse tree, and in
>> some parses it isn't.
>> Is this difference significant in some way?
> well, i would consider what you observe a bug. which processor did you
> use in creating this profile? incidentally, francis reported something
> along these lines last week. we should no doubt iron this out.
> in principle, as of early 2007, all derivations should include the root
> symbol that licensed them. [incr tsdb()] is backwards compatible with
> its treatment of derivations, i.e. it will successfully reconstruct and
> treebank both variants (the root information is not needed for that).
> but for future parse selection experiments, i would expect the root may
> prove a useful feature, hence we should aim to always have it reported.
> all best - oe
> +++ Universitetet i Oslo (IFI); Boks 1080 Blindern; 0316 Oslo; (+47) 2284 0125
> +++ CSLI Stanford; Ventura Hall; Stanford, CA 94305; (+1 650) 723 0515
> +++ --- oe at ifi.uio.no; oe at csli.stanford.edu; stephan at oepen.net ---
More information about the developers