Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:41:17.386Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Evaluating two methods for Treebank grammar compaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 1999

ALEXANDER KROTOV
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 211 Portobello Street, Sheffield S1 4DP, UK; [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
MARK HEPPLE
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 211 Portobello Street, Sheffield S1 4DP, UK; [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
ROBERT GAIZAUSKAS
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 211 Portobello Street, Sheffield S1 4DP, UK; [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
YORICK WILKS
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 211 Portobello Street, Sheffield S1 4DP, UK; [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract

Treebanks, such as the Penn Treebank, provide a basis for the automatic creation of broad coverage grammars. In the simplest case, rules can simply be ‘read off’ the parse-annotations of the corpus, producing either a simple or probabilistic context-free grammar. Such grammars, however, can be very large, presenting problems for the subsequent computational costs of parsing under the grammar. In this paper, we explore ways by which a treebank grammar can be reduced in size or ‘compacted’, which involve the use of two kinds of technique: (i) thresholding of rules by their number of occurrences; and (ii) a method of rule-parsing, which has both probabilistic and non-probabilistic variants. Our results show that by a combined use of these two techniques, a probabilistic context-free grammar can be reduced in size by 62% without any loss in parsing performance, and by 71% to give a gain in recall, but some loss in precision.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)