<div dir="ltr">Perhaps there is some disagreement between my item and relations files? I generated the item file using the xigt exporter. I believe this is the corresponding relation file (it's the one I point to when using the exporter). I've attached both. I am creating the profile with the following steps (in python):<div> ts = itsdb.TestSuite('./unprocessed/wmb/')<br> ace.compile('./wmb/ace/config.tdl', './wmb/ace/wmb.dat')</div><div> with ace.AceParser('./wmb/ace/wmb.dat') as cpu:<br> ts.process(cpu)<br> ts.write(path='./output/processed/wmb'r)<br><div><br></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 1:06 PM Stephan Oepen <<a href="mailto:oe@ifi.uio.no">oe@ifi.uio.no</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">yes, the 'parse' file (like the other files in a tsdb(1) database) is<br>
a textual encoding of a set of tuples. what you quote looks<br>
suspiciously spartan to me, with only the first three fields filled<br>
and the number of 'readings' filled in. in a regular profile, i would<br>
expect a record of the initial and internal tokenization, various<br>
timings, and statistics about lexical instantiation and chart<br>
construction. i am relatively sure that ACE does account for most of<br>
these, so i suspect that information is getting lost somewhere in your<br>
pipeline.<br>
<br>
oe<br>
<br>
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 9:56 PM Kristen Howell <<a href="mailto:kphowell@uw.edu" target="_blank">kphowell@uw.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Thank you Stephan. Would the 'parse' relations be the lines the parse file? They each look something like this:<br>
> 0@0@0@-1@@-1@@0@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@-1@@@<br>
> Perhaps this means that the error field among other things is not being populated?<br>
> Then the question for Mike and/or Woodley would be if it is expected to be populated.<br>
><br>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 12:33 PM Stephan Oepen <<a href="mailto:oe@ifi.uio.no" target="_blank">oe@ifi.uio.no</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> hi kristen,<br>
>><br>
>> i had to peak at the [incr tsdb()] code myself; 'Browse Errors' will<br>
>> extract all items where the 'error' field (in the 'parse' relation) is<br>
>> a non-empty string. so, if nothing comes up there, presumably there<br>
>> either were not errors, or ACE does not populate that field?<br>
>><br>
>> likewise, the pre-canned 'unproblematic' condition amounts to 'error<br>
>> == ""', i.e. an empty string in that field. to some degree, what to<br>
>> consider an 'error' is arguably up to the parsing engine. from<br>
>> memory, i believe that both the LKB and PET will generate some<br>
>> descriptive 'error' string for example in case of missing lexical<br>
>> entries for some of the input tokens.<br>
>><br>
>> it appears that ACE (or pyDelphin, not sure about the division of<br>
>> labor here) maybe simply does not populate the 'error' field in the<br>
>> profiles that it generates?<br>
>><br>
>> best wishes, oe<br>
>><br>
>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 7:09 PM Kristen Howell <<a href="mailto:kphowell@uw.edu" target="_blank">kphowell@uw.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Hi Mike and Woodley (and others?),<br>
>> ><br>
>> > I've created some itsdb profiles using pydelphin and a grammar loaded in ace. I am trying to browse the profile in [incr tsdb()]. The results and coverage show up fine. However, when I try to browse errors, nothing happens. Also when I try to view items with lexical coverage (using tsdl condition--> unproblematic and then browse --> test items), I see all of the items, not just those with lexical coverage.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Is this expected to work with pydelphin profiles? If so, what might be missing? My profile contains non empty item, parse, result, relations, run files.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Thanks for your help,<br>
>> > Kristen<br>
</blockquote></div>