2016
DOI: 10.1007/s13748-016-0097-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fuzzy sets across the natural language generation pipeline

Abstract: We explore the implications of using fuzzy techniques (mainly those commonly used in the linguistic description/summarization of data discipline) from a natural language generation perspective. For this, we provide an extensive discussion of some general convergence points and an exploration of the relationship between the different tasks involved in the standard NLG system pipeline architecture and the most common fuzzy approaches used in linguistic summarization/description of data, such as fuzzy quantified … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
(81 reference statements)
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have seen that our algorithms for the generation of quantified descriptions bear some striking resemblances with existing algorithms designed for a very different problem, namely REG. We plan to look at some recent advances of REG algorithms, such as those of Ramos-Soto et al (2016); Monroe and Potts (2015); Li et al (2018);van Gompel et al (2019) to see how they can inspire improvements of our QDG models.…”
Section: Discussion and Future Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We have seen that our algorithms for the generation of quantified descriptions bear some striking resemblances with existing algorithms designed for a very different problem, namely REG. We plan to look at some recent advances of REG algorithms, such as those of Ramos-Soto et al (2016); Monroe and Potts (2015); Li et al (2018);van Gompel et al (2019) to see how they can inspire improvements of our QDG models.…”
Section: Discussion and Future Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Quantified Expression Generation. Previous computational models of speakers' choice of quantifiers focus on the choice between a limited number of candidate quantifiers (Grefenstette, 2013;Yildirim et al, 2013;Herbelot and Vecchi, 2015;Sorodoc et al, 2016;Castillo-Ortega et al, 2009;Barr et al, 2013;Ramos-Soto et al, 2016). Barr et al (2013) studies the use of quantifiers that Most of the items are red circles, but there are a couple of blue squares.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Likewise, as we mentioned in Section 1, fuzzy sets have also been proposed in a more general way to be used in D2T systems to model vague terms [2,18,19]. To our knowledge, as of today the only D2T system which uses this kind of techniques and has been deployed in a real environment is GALiWeather [5].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Quite often, temporal and geographical expressions that need to be included in texts generated by D2T systems are vague, such as "in the evening" [4] or "southwestern areas" [17]. In situations where vagueness (and thus borderline cases and gradual concepts) is present, fuzzy sets have been proposed as a tool that allows to model linguistic expressions for NLG/D2T systems [2,18,19]. However, current existing D2T systems do not make use of such techniques, with the exception of GALiWeather [5], which provides a basic use of fuzzy sets to model temporal expressions and quantifiers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The field of linguistic description of data (LDD) has emerged from the use of fuzzy set theory and soft computing to perform linguistic computations on data, which studies the methods for automatically describing numeric data sets by employing a set of linguistic terms (Ramos-Soto, Bugarín, & Barro, 2016). Fuzzy set theory is a well-studied approach to bridge between numeric and linguistic information, specifically in perception-based systems (Batyrshin et al, 2007;Kacprzyk & Zadrożny, 2010).…”
Section: Related Work On Semantic Inferences and Linguistic Descriptionsmentioning
confidence: 99%