[pet] passing in some but not all tags

[Bec Dridan]

Hi Paul,

DEFAULT_LES controls when we use the default generics rather than, or
possibly alongside the native entry.
The options mean, as far as I understand them:

NO_DEFAULT_LES: if there is no native entry, do nothing, ignore tags, parse
will fail.
DEFAULT_LES_ALL: always create a generic entry from any input POS tags
(although these can be filtered out later)
DEFAULT_LES_POSGAPS_LEXGAPS: create a generic entry from any input POS tags
only where there was no native entry available

None of them have anything to do with restricting native entries.

Restricting lexical entries the way you want is generally called
supertagging, although the term "supertag" also refers to the fact that the
tags generally used in this manner are more fine-grained than standard POS
tags. Unfortunately, that's not in the mainstream PET release so far,
because it is not that straightforward. There are several development
implementations around that might do what you want, but they would all need
to be configured to your particular set up. For one thing, the mapping from
PTB tags isn't always clear-cut - the ERG lexical entries don't always
align exactly with the PTB distinctions and so most (all?) work has been
based on restricting by tags related to the lexical entries.  As far as I
know, there's no current implementations that can restrict by PTB POS tags,
although others might know?

Rebecca







On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Paul Haley <paul at haleyai.com> wrote:

>  I should correct my prior...
>
> It is not that the native LEs are taking precedence, but that native LEs
> that are not consistent with the input PoS are still being added to the
> chart.
>
> For example, if I pass in "array" with "NN", I'm still getting array_v1 in
> the chart.  I want array_n1 in the chart.  So, what I'm after is pruning
> the native LEs to those that are consistent with the input PoS (or living
> with the generics in the case of no natives).
>
> Does that sound like what you called super-tagging?
>
> Paul
>
>
> On 9/18/2013 10:04 AM, Paul Haley wrote:
>
> I had that fear, too!  Which is why I asked.
>
> I gave it a try with no default LEs.  To my surprise, the native lexical
> entries are still taking precedence!  (So I must be missing something.)
>
> On 9/18/2013 9:42 AM, Bec Dridan wrote:
>
>   Hi Paul,
>
>  The POS input to PET is only designed for unknown word handling (ie when
> there are no corresponding ERG LEs, as you noticed).  It sounds like what
> you are after is more like supertagging, restricting the lexical types used
> according to some tags on the input? I've played around a bit with
> different methods to do that, but none of them are currently in the main
> branch of PET.
>
>  What you propose with the filtering rule will, I think, force the grammar
> to use generic types everywhere, rather than use what's in the lexicon. I
> very much doubt that is what you want to do?
>
>  Rebecca
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Paul Haley <paul at haleyai.com> wrote:
>
>>  Hello,
>>
>> I may be making some conceptual progress on this...
>>
>> I went back to the chart mapping tutorial (
>> http://moin.delph-in.net/Chart_Mapping) and found myself looking at the
>> following lexical filtering rule from the ERG's lfr.tdl:
>>
>> ;; throw out generic whenever a native entry is available, unless the
>> token is
>> ;; a named entity (which now includes names activated because of mixed
>> case or
>> ;; non-sentence-initial capitalization).
>> ;;
>> generic_non_ne+native_lfr := lexical_filtering_rule &
>> [ +CONTEXT < [ SYNSEM.PHON.ONSET con_or_voc ] >,
>>   +INPUT < [ SYNSEM.PHON.ONSET unk_onset, ORTH.CLASS non_ne ] >,
>>   +OUTPUT < >,
>>   +POSITION "I1 at C1" ].
>>
>>  Is it the case that I want the +CONTEXT and +INPUT to be exactly
>> reversed with NO_DEFAULT_LES or DEFAULT_LES_POSGAPS_LEXGAPS?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> On 9/17/2013 4:54 PM, Paul Haley wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It seems that when I send FSC w/ TNT tags for some but not all tokens I
>> get ERG LEs that do not satisfy the provided tags when using any of
>> NO_DEFAULT_LES, DEFAULT_LES_ALL, or DEFAULT_LES_POSGAPS_LEXGAPS.  It does
>> respect these tags when there are no corresponding ERG LEs, however, which
>> is good.
>>
>> Is there a way that I can get PET w/ the ERG to respect the TNT tags when
>> provided but otherwise use the ERG LEs?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.delph-in.net/archives/pet/attachments/20130918/7a692545/attachment.html>