[developers] "Quite" problematic: MRS -> EDS conversion

Michael Wayne Goodman goodmami at uw.edu
Tue Jul 17 00:29:37 CEST 2018

Thanks for replying!

I'll look forward to further discussion when you're back from vacation.

I forgot to add that my tests were using the ERG online demonstrator, which
is running the 1214 version. I have not compared the outputs with a more
recent version of the ERG.

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 2:53 PM, Stephan Oepen <oe at ifi.uio.no> wrote:

> hi mike,
> i am glad to hear that you are working to fully implement conversion
> to EDS in PyDelphin and make results (more) LKB-compliant.  from our
> earlier round of comparing across EDS code bases, i believe the EDSs
> produced by the ERG on-line demonstrator should in most cases be a
> good target representation.
> i am still on vacation for another good week but hope to return to
> this thread in early august.  for the time being, you are certainly
> right that the EDS settings in the ERG trunk have yet to be updated
> for the forthcoming release (so far, i still mostly work with the
> current release version, i.e. 1214).  also, i cannot immediately
> recall why /^neg$/ is on the list of candidate predicate modifiers,
> and probably /^_quite_x$/ should be generalized to not be anchored
> string-initially.
> in general, i recall thinking back then (around 2012, i believe) that
> i should put more effort into compiling a fuller list of candidate
> modifiers; i also was wondering whether to provide a parallel
> mechanism to allow constraining the targets of predicate modification,
> e.g. limit this facility (in the ERG) to quantifiers.  your double
> modification example might well provide motivation to actually
> implement such a constraint ...
> more generally, i believe there are still interesting corner-cases to
> be discussed in selecting the representative predication in some
> configurations that involve logical conjunction (label sharing);
> please see towards the end of the following page:
> http://moin.delph-in.net/EdsConversion
> if you are game, i would be happy to go back to our exercise of
> systematically comparing EDS conversion results across code bases this
> fall :-).  maybe we can even get bec engaged for another round?
> best wishes, oe
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Michael Wayne Goodman <goodmami at uw.edu>
> wrote:
> > Hi developers (but mostly Stephan and Dan),
> >
> > I'm turning my attention briefly from TDL to making the MRS -> EDS
> > conversion in PyDelphin more harmonious with the LKB, and the first
> order of
> > business is implementing "predicate modification".
> >
> > I'd like to only use grammar-agnostic graph properties to find the
> > "representative nodes" of EP conjunctions, as I do with MRS -> DMRS
> > conversion, but the LKB currently does a regex match on the predicates of
> > EPs in a conjunction, something like "if the predicate matches
> > /_x_deg$|^neg$|^_quite_x$/ and it's ARG1 is not currently assigned, set
> its
> > ARG1 to point to another EP in the conjunction, with some other
> heuristics
> > at work to select that other EP. (Aside: I think this ERG-specific regex
> > pattern is now grammar-defined instead of being baked into the LKB, but
> > currently I only see lkb/eds.lsp in the LOGON version of the ERG---not
> the
> > trunk version) The _x_deg$ subpattern handles, e.g., "nearly all", "not
> > all", etc., but I was having trouble finding a construction where the
> neg$
> > subpattern selected a predicate modifier (any ideas?).
> >
> > My main concern, however, is with the _quite_x$ subpattern. It seems to
> work
> > well enough with "quite a few dogs bark." and "quite many dogs bark."
> (and
> > also "quite all dogs bark" and "quite dogs bark", but my grammaticality
> > judgments differ with the ERG's here). "Not quite all dogs bark" uses
> > _not+quite_x, which doesn't match any subpattern and thus is
> disconnected in
> > EDS. The strangest one is "quite nearly all dogs barked", where in the
> > _quite_x and _nearly_x_deg select each other, cyclically, as their ARG1s
> > (the MRS for this is as one would expect).
> >
> > My guess is that the *eds-predicate-modifiers* pattern is out of sync
> and/or
> > insufficient with the current ERG. There are bigger issues here, such as
> our
> > ever-unsatisfying treatment of quantifier modification, but right now I'm
> > just trying to figure out a good way to do EDS conversion.
> >
> > A request, though: if we're not going to allow quantifiers to be
> selected as
> > the ARG1 of degree modifiers in MRS, can we use a different role (e.g.,
> MOD)
> > in EDS? That would make back-conversion simpler, I think.
> >
> > --
> > Michael Wayne Goodman

Michael Wayne Goodman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.delph-in.net/archives/developers/attachments/20180716/9ad4bfac/attachment.html>

More information about the developers mailing list