2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8640.2011.00402.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Syntactic Simplification and Semantic Enrichment-Trimming Dependency Graphs for Event Extraction

Abstract: In our approach to event extraction, dependency graphs constitute the fundamental data structure for knowledge capture. Two types of trimming operations pave the way to more effective relation extraction. First, we simplify the syntactic representation structures resulting from parsing by pruning informationally irrelevant lexical material from dependency graphs. Second, we enrich informationally relevant lexical material in the simplified dependency graphs with additional semantic meta data at several layers … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It was shown in [33] that the size of this subgraph correlates with the class of the event: positive instances are present typically in smaller subgraphs. For the same dataset, in [34] it is shown that the distance between trigger and potential arguments is much smaller for positive than for negative instances.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It was shown in [33] that the size of this subgraph correlates with the class of the event: positive instances are present typically in smaller subgraphs. For the same dataset, in [34] it is shown that the distance between trigger and potential arguments is much smaller for positive than for negative instances.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This higher performance can be explained by the fact that the SPIES system was evaluated only on a corpus that contained no sentence without a positive example. Filtering by trigger-word-based pattern evaluation was also performed by Cohen et al [ 16 ] and by Buyko et al [ 27 ], specifically for the BioNLP task. Cohen et al [ 16 ] order trigger words by frequency and keep only the top 10-30% (depending on the event type) for pattern generation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Semantic relations are usually binary, and can be expressed as grammaticosemantic links between lexical units, e.g. named entities, for example: X father-of Y or father-of(X, Y) where X and Y are instances of named entity types; by syntactic dependencies, which approximate the underlying semantic relationships [15]; or by conventional RDF S-V-O triples, which is a universal representation of relations. Moreover, semantic relations are often terminological relations, e.g.…”
Section: Relations and Eventsmentioning
confidence: 99%