DOCSLIB.ORG

Framenet II: Extended Theory and Practice

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Framenet II: Extended Theory and Practice FrameNet II: Extended Theory and Practice Josef Ruppenhofer Michael Ellsworth Miriam R. L. Petruck Christopher R. Johnson Jan Scheffczyk Printed August 7, 2006 2 Contents 1 Introduction to the Project 5 1.1 Comparison with WordNet and ontologies . 7 1.2 What do we mean by word? . 8 2 Frame Development 11 3 FrameNet Annotation 19 3.1 Introduction . 19 3.2 Lexicographically motivated annotation practices . 23 3.3 Annotation with verbs as targets . 49 3.4 Annotation with nouns as targets . 52 3.5 Annotation with adjectives as targets . 62 3.6 Annotation with adverbs as targets . 62 3.7 Annotation with prepositions as targets . 63 3.8 Annotation relative to slot fillers . 65 4 Identifying Phrase Types 67 4.1 List of phrase types . 68 4.2 Phrase Type Labels for Noun Phrases . 72 4.3 Phrase Type Labels for Prepositional Phrases . 74 4.4 Phrase Type Labels for Verb Phrases . 78 4.5 Phrase Type Labels for Clauses . 81 4.6 Phrase Type Labels for Adjective Phrases . 85 4.7 Phrase Type Labels for Adverb Phrases (AVP) . 87 4.8 Phrase Type Labels for Quantifiers (QUANT) . 87 4.9 Phrase Type Labels for Quotes (QUO) . 87 5 Assigning Grammatical Functions 89 5.1 List of Grammatical Functions . 91 5.2 Assigning GFs for Verbs . 92 5.3 Assigning GFs for Adjectives . 96 5.4 Assigning GFs for Adverbs . 98 5.5 Assigning GFs for Prepositions . 99 5.6 Assigning GFs for Nouns . 100 3 4 CONTENTS 6 Semantic Relations and Types 103 6.1 Frame-to-frame Relations . 104 6.2 Semantic Type . 111 6.3 How to use relations . 120 7 Consistency Management in FrameNet 129 7.1 The Technical Architecture of FrameNet . 130 7.2 Techniques for Managing Quality . 131 7.3 Tolerant Quality Management . 131 7.4 Achievements . 132 A Major Extra-thematic Frame Elements 135 A.1 FEs related to temporal structure . 136 A.2 FEs related to places . 138 A.3 FEs related to additional participants . 140 A.4 FEs describing participants . 142 A.5 FEs describing events . 143 A.6 FEs related to co-occurring events and circumstances . 146 A.7 FEs related to the causal chain . 149 A.8 Other . 155 A.9 Constructionally induced interpretations . 157 Bibliography 161 Index 162 Chapter 1 Introduction to the Project The Berkeley FrameNet project is creating an on-line lexical resource for En- glish, based on frame semantics and supported by corpus evidence. The aim is to document the range of semantic and syntactic combinatory possibilities{ valences{of each word in each of its senses, through computer-assisted anno- tation of example sentences and automatic tabulation and display of the anno- tation results. The major product of this work, the FrameNet lexical database, currently contains more than 10,000 lexical units (defined below), more than 6,000 of which are fully annotated, in nearly 800 hierarchically-related semantic frames, exemplified in more than 135,000 annotated sentences. Beginning with Release 1.3, the quality of FrameNet data is monitored by a consistency manage- ment system. The database has gone through three releases, and is now in use by hundreds of researchers, teachers, and students around the world. (See the FrameNet Users page on our web-site). Active research projects are seeking to produce comparable frame-semantic lexicons for other languages and to devise means of automatically labeling running text with semantic frame information. A lexical unit (LU) is a pairing of a word with a meaning. Typically, each sense of a polysemous word belongs to a different semantic frame, a script- like conceptual structure that describes a particular type of situation, object, or event along with its participants and props. For example, the Apply heat frame describes a common situation involving a Cook, some Food, and a Heating Instrument, and is evoked by words such as bake, blanch, boil, broil, brown, simmer, steam, etc. We call these roles frame elements (FEs) and the frame-evoking words are LUs in the Apply heat frame. Some frames are more abstract, such as Change position on a scale, which is evoked by LUs such as decline, decrease, gain, plummet, rise, etc., and has FEs such as Item, Attribute, Initial value and Final value. In the simplest case, the frame-evoking LU is a verb and the FEs are its syntactic dependents: [Cook Matilde] fried [Food the catfish] [Heating instrument in a heavy iron skillet]. 5 6 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION TO THE PROJECT [Item Colgate's stock] rose [Difference $3.64] [Final value to $49.94]. However, event nouns such as reduction in the Cause change of scalar position frame also evoke frames: ...the reduction [Item of debt levels] [Value 2 to $665 million] [Value 1 from $2.6 billion] or adjectives such as asleep in the Sleep frame: [Sleeper They] [Copula were] asleep [Duration for hours] The lexical entry for a predicating word, derived from such annotations, identifies the frame which underlies a given meaning and specifies the ways in which FEs are realized in structures headed by the word. Many common nouns, such as artifacts like hat or tower, typically serve as dependents rather than clearly evoking their own frames. The main purpose of annotating such items is to identify the most common predicates that govern phrases headed by them, and thus to illustrate the ways in which these common nouns function as FEs within frames evoked by the governing predicates. We do recognize that artifact and natural kind nouns also have a minimal frame structure of their own. For example, artifacts often occur together with expressions indicating their sub-type, the material of which they are made, their manner of production, and their purpose/use; these are defined as FEs in the frames for various types of artifacts. Consider two example sentences from the Clothing frame. (1) He took a packet of Woodbines out of the breast pocket of [his Wearer] [cotton Material] [shirt Garment] and lit one. (2) She had a [white Descriptor] [silk Material] [blouse Gar- ment] on, and a severe grey skirt that reached halfway down her calves. However, the frames evoked by artifact and natural kind nouns rarely dom- inate the clauses in which they occur, and so are seldom selected as targets of annotation. Formally, FrameNet annotations are constellations of triples that make up the frame element realization for each annotated sentence, each consisting of a frame element (for example, Food), a grammatical function (say, Object) and a phrase type (say, NP). We think of these three types of annotation on each tagged frame element as layers and they are displayed as such in the annotation software used in the project. However, to avoid visual clutter, the grammatical function and phrase type layers are not displayed in the web-based report system. The full data, available as part of the data download (see the FN- data link on the FrameNet homepage), include these three layers (and several more not discussed here) for all of the annotated sentences, along with com- plete frame and FE descriptions, frame-to-frame relations, and lexical entries summarizing the valence patterns for each annotated LU. 1.1. COMPARISON WITH WORDNET AND ONTOLOGIES 7 FrameNet annotations derive from two sources. In pursuing the goal of recording the range of semantic and syntactic combinatory possibilities (va- lences) of each word in each of its senses, we normally concentrate on a par- ticular target LU and extract sentences from the different texts of a corpus containing that LU. Then we annotate a selection of the extracted sentences in respect to the target LU. In another kind of work that represents a much smaller percentage of our overall annotations, we annotate running text. Full- text annotation differs from sentence annotation mostly in that the sentences are chosen for us, so to speak, by the author of the text. The annotation of running text is technically possible thanks to the annotation layering technique: FN lexicographers can one by one declare each word in a sentence a target, select a frame relative to which the new target is to be annotated, get a new set of annotation layers (frame element, grammatical function, phrase type) and appropriate frame element tags, and then annotate the relevant constituents. 1.1 Comparison with WordNet and ontologies The FrameNet database is a lexical resource with unique characteristics that differentiate it from other resources such as commercially available dictionaries and thesauri as well as from the best-known on-line lexical resource, WordNet. • Like dictionary subentries, FrameNet lexical units come with definitions, either from the Concise Oxford Dictionary, 10th Edition (courtesy of Ox- ford University Press) or a definition written by a FrameNet staff member. • Unlike commercial dictionaries, we provide multiple annotated examples of each sense of a word (i.e. each lexical unit). Moreover, the set of examples (approximately 20 per LU) illustrates all of the combinatorial possibilities of the lexical unit. • The examples are attestations taken from naturalistic corpora, rather than constructed by a linguist or lexicographer. The main FrameNet corpus is the 100-million-word British National CorpusBritish National Corpus (BNC), which is both large and balanced across genres (editorials, text- books, advertisements, novels, sermons, etc.), but, of course, lacks many specifically American expressions. We also use U.S. newswire texts pro- vided by the Linguistic Data ConsortiumLinguistic Data Consortium, and have recently acquired the newly released initial part of the American Na- tional Corpus, which we will begin using soon. • Our analysis of the English lexicon proceeds frame by frame rather than by lemma, whereas traditional dictionary-making proceeds word by word through the alphabet.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Malware Classification with BERT
    San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Master's Projects Master's Theses and Graduate Research Spring 5-25-2021 Malware Classification with BERT Joel Lawrence Alvares Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_projects Part of the Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Commons, and the Information Security Commons Malware Classification with Word Embeddings Generated by BERT and Word2Vec Malware Classification with BERT Presented to Department of Computer Science San José State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree By Joel Alvares May 2021 Malware Classification with Word Embeddings Generated by BERT and Word2Vec The Designated Project Committee Approves the Project Titled Malware Classification with BERT by Joel Lawrence Alvares APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE San Jose State University May 2021 Prof. Fabio Di Troia Department of Computer Science Prof. William Andreopoulos Department of Computer Science Prof. Katerina Potika Department of Computer Science 1 Malware Classification with Word Embeddings Generated by BERT and Word2Vec ABSTRACT Malware Classification is used to distinguish unique types of malware from each other. This project aims to carry out malware classification using word embeddings which are used in Natural Language Processing (NLP) to identify and evaluate the relationship between words of a sentence. Word embeddings generated by BERT and Word2Vec for malware samples to carry out multi-class classification. BERT is a transformer based pre- trained natural language processing (NLP) model which can be used for a wide range of tasks such as question answering, paraphrase generation and next sentence prediction. However, the attention mechanism of a pre-trained BERT model can also be used in malware classification by capturing information about relation between each opcode and every other opcode belonging to a malware family.
    [Show full text]
  • Bros:Apre-Trained Language Model for Understanding Textsin Document
    Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2021 BROS: A PRE-TRAINED LANGUAGE MODEL FOR UNDERSTANDING TEXTS IN DOCUMENT Anonymous authors Paper under double-blind review ABSTRACT Understanding document from their visual snapshots is an emerging and chal- lenging problem that requires both advanced computer vision and NLP methods. Although the recent advance in OCR enables the accurate extraction of text seg- ments, it is still challenging to extract key information from documents due to the diversity of layouts. To compensate for the difficulties, this paper introduces a pre-trained language model, BERT Relying On Spatiality (BROS), that represents and understands the semantics of spatially distributed texts. Different from pre- vious pre-training methods on 1D text, BROS is pre-trained on large-scale semi- structured documents with a novel area-masking strategy while efficiently includ- ing the spatial layout information of input documents. Also, to generate structured outputs in various document understanding tasks, BROS utilizes a powerful graph- based decoder that can capture the relation between text segments. BROS achieves state-of-the-art results on four benchmark tasks: FUNSD, SROIE*, CORD, and SciTSR. Our experimental settings and implementation codes will be publicly available. 1 INTRODUCTION Document intelligence (DI)1, which understands industrial documents from their visual appearance, is a critical application of AI in business. One of the important challenges of DI is a key information extraction task (KIE) (Huang et al., 2019; Jaume et al., 2019; Park et al., 2019) that extracts struc- tured information from documents such as financial reports, invoices, business emails, insurance quotes, and many others.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Extraction Based on Named Entity for Tourism Corpus
    Information Extraction based on Named Entity for Tourism Corpus Chantana Chantrapornchai Aphisit Tunsakul Dept. of Computer Engineering Dept. of Computer Engineering Faculty of Engineering Faculty of Engineering Kasetsart University Kasetsart University Bangkok, Thailand Bangkok, Thailand [email protected] [email protected] Abstract— Tourism information is scattered around nowa- The ontology is extracted based on HTML web structure, days. To search for the information, it is usually time consuming and the corpus is based on WordNet. For these approaches, to browse through the results from search engine, select and the time consuming process is the annotation which is to view the details of each accommodation. In this paper, we present a methodology to extract particular information from annotate the type of name entity. In this paper, we target at full text returned from the search engine to facilitate the users. the tourism domain, and aim to extract particular information Then, the users can specifically look to the desired relevant helping for ontology data acquisition. information. The approach can be used for the same task in We present the framework for the given named entity ex- other domains. The main steps are 1) building training data traction. Starting from the web information scraping process, and 2) building recognition model. First, the tourism data is gathered and the vocabularies are built. The raw corpus is used the data are selected based on the HTML tag for corpus to train for creating vocabulary embedding. Also, it is used building. The data is used for model creation for automatic for creating annotated data.
    [Show full text]
  • NLP with BERT: Sentiment Analysis Using SAS® Deep Learning and Dlpy Doug Cairns and Xiangxiang Meng, SAS Institute Inc
    Paper SAS4429-2020 NLP with BERT: Sentiment Analysis Using SAS® Deep Learning and DLPy Doug Cairns and Xiangxiang Meng, SAS Institute Inc. ABSTRACT A revolution is taking place in natural language processing (NLP) as a result of two ideas. The first idea is that pretraining a deep neural network as a language model is a good starting point for a range of NLP tasks. These networks can be augmented (layers can be added or dropped) and then fine-tuned with transfer learning for specific NLP tasks. The second idea involves a paradigm shift away from traditional recurrent neural networks (RNNs) and toward deep neural networks based on Transformer building blocks. One architecture that embodies these ideas is Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT). BERT and its variants have been at or near the top of the leaderboard for many traditional NLP tasks, such as the general language understanding evaluation (GLUE) benchmarks. This paper provides an overview of BERT and shows how you can create your own BERT model by using SAS® Deep Learning and the SAS DLPy Python package. It illustrates the effectiveness of BERT by performing sentiment analysis on unstructured product reviews submitted to Amazon. INTRODUCTION Providing a computer-based analog for the conceptual and syntactic processing that occurs in the human brain for spoken or written communication has proven extremely challenging. As a simple example, consider the abstract for this (or any) technical paper. If well written, it should be a concise summary of what you will learn from reading the paper. As a reader, you expect to see some or all of the following: • Technical context and/or problem • Key contribution(s) • Salient result(s) If you were tasked to create a computer-based tool for summarizing papers, how would you translate your expectations as a reader into an implementable algorithm? This is the type of problem that the field of natural language processing (NLP) addresses.
    [Show full text]
  • Unified Language Model Pre-Training for Natural
    Unified Language Model Pre-training for Natural Language Understanding and Generation Li Dong∗ Nan Yang∗ Wenhui Wang∗ Furu Wei∗† Xiaodong Liu Yu Wang Jianfeng Gao Ming Zhou Hsiao-Wuen Hon Microsoft Research {lidong1,nanya,wenwan,fuwei}@microsoft.com {xiaodl,yuwan,jfgao,mingzhou,hon}@microsoft.com Abstract This paper presents a new UNIfied pre-trained Language Model (UNILM) that can be fine-tuned for both natural language understanding and generation tasks. The model is pre-trained using three types of language modeling tasks: unidirec- tional, bidirectional, and sequence-to-sequence prediction. The unified modeling is achieved by employing a shared Transformer network and utilizing specific self-attention masks to control what context the prediction conditions on. UNILM compares favorably with BERT on the GLUE benchmark, and the SQuAD 2.0 and CoQA question answering tasks. Moreover, UNILM achieves new state-of- the-art results on five natural language generation datasets, including improving the CNN/DailyMail abstractive summarization ROUGE-L to 40.51 (2.04 absolute improvement), the Gigaword abstractive summarization ROUGE-L to 35.75 (0.86 absolute improvement), the CoQA generative question answering F1 score to 82.5 (37.1 absolute improvement), the SQuAD question generation BLEU-4 to 22.12 (3.75 absolute improvement), and the DSTC7 document-grounded dialog response generation NIST-4 to 2.67 (human performance is 2.65). The code and pre-trained models are available at https://github.com/microsoft/unilm. 1 Introduction Language model (LM) pre-training has substantially advanced the state of the art across a variety of natural language processing tasks [8, 29, 19, 31, 9, 1].
    [Show full text]
  • Question Answering by Bert
    Running head: QUESTION AND ANSWERING USING BERT 1 Question and Answering Using BERT Suman Karanjit, Computer SCience Major Minnesota State University Moorhead Link to GitHub https://github.com/skaranjit/BertQA QUESTION AND ANSWERING USING BERT 2 Table of Contents ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 4 SQUAD ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 BERT EXPLAINED ...................................................................................................................................... 5 WHAT IS BERT? .......................................................................................................................................... 5 ARCHITECTURE ............................................................................................................................................ 5 INPUT PROCESSING ...................................................................................................................................... 6 GETTING ANSWER ........................................................................................................................................ 8 SETTING UP THE ENVIRONMENT. ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Distilling BERT for Natural Language Understanding
    TinyBERT: Distilling BERT for Natural Language Understanding Xiaoqi Jiao1∗,y Yichun Yin2∗z, Lifeng Shang2z, Xin Jiang2 Xiao Chen2, Linlin Li3, Fang Wang1z and Qun Liu2 1Key Laboratory of Information Storage System, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan National Laboratory for Optoelectronics 2Huawei Noah’s Ark Lab 3Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. fjiaoxiaoqi,[email protected] fyinyichun,shang.lifeng,[email protected] fchen.xiao2,lynn.lilinlin,[email protected] Abstract natural language processing (NLP). Pre-trained lan- guage models (PLMs), such as BERT (Devlin et al., Language model pre-training, such as BERT, has significantly improved the performances 2019), XLNet (Yang et al., 2019), RoBERTa (Liu of many natural language processing tasks. et al., 2019), ALBERT (Lan et al., 2020), T5 (Raf- However, pre-trained language models are usu- fel et al., 2019) and ELECTRA (Clark et al., 2020), ally computationally expensive, so it is diffi- have achieved great success in many NLP tasks cult to efficiently execute them on resource- (e.g., the GLUE benchmark (Wang et al., 2018) restricted devices. To accelerate inference and the challenging multi-hop reasoning task (Ding and reduce model size while maintaining et al., 2019)). However, PLMs usually have a accuracy, we first propose a novel Trans- former distillation method that is specially de- large number of parameters and take long infer- signed for knowledge distillation (KD) of the ence time, which are difficult to be deployed on Transformer-based models. By leveraging this edge devices such as mobile phones. Recent stud- new KD method, the plenty of knowledge en- ies (Kovaleva et al., 2019; Michel et al., 2019; Voita coded in a large “teacher” BERT can be ef- et al., 2019) demonstrate that there is redundancy fectively transferred to a small “student” Tiny- in PLMs.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2104.05274V2 [Cs.CL] 27 Aug 2021 NLP field Due to Its Excellent Performance in Various Tasks
    Learning to Remove: Towards Isotropic Pre-trained BERT Embedding Yuxin Liang1, Rui Cao1, Jie Zheng?1, Jie Ren2, and Ling Gao1 1 Northwest University, Xi'an, China fliangyuxin,[email protected], fjzheng,[email protected] 2 Shannxi Normal University, Xi'an, China [email protected] Abstract. Research in word representation shows that isotropic em- beddings can significantly improve performance on downstream tasks. However, we measure and analyze the geometry of pre-trained BERT embedding and find that it is far from isotropic. We find that the word vectors are not centered around the origin, and the average cosine similar- ity between two random words is much higher than zero, which indicates that the word vectors are distributed in a narrow cone and deteriorate the representation capacity of word embedding. We propose a simple, and yet effective method to fix this problem: remove several dominant directions of BERT embedding with a set of learnable weights. We train the weights on word similarity tasks and show that processed embed- ding is more isotropic. Our method is evaluated on three standardized tasks: word similarity, word analogy, and semantic textual similarity. In all tasks, the word embedding processed by our method consistently out- performs the original embedding (with average improvement of 13% on word analogy and 16% on semantic textual similarity) and two baseline methods. Our method is also proven to be more robust to changes of hyperparameter. Keywords: Natural language processing · Pre-trained embedding · Word representation · Anisotropic. 1 Introduction With the rise of Transformers [12], its derivative model BERT [1] stormed the arXiv:2104.05274v2 [cs.CL] 27 Aug 2021 NLP field due to its excellent performance in various tasks.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient Training of BERT by Progressively Stacking
    Efficient Training of BERT by Progressively Stacking Linyuan Gong 1 Di He 1 Zhuohan Li 1 Tao Qin 2 Liwei Wang 1 3 Tie-Yan Liu 2 Abstract especially in domains that require particular expertise. Unsupervised pre-training is commonly used in In natural language processing, using unsupervised pre- natural language processing: a deep neural net- trained models is one of the most effective ways to help work trained with proper unsupervised prediction train tasks in which labeled information is not rich enough. tasks are shown to be effective in many down- For example, word embedding learned from Wikipedia cor- stream tasks. Because it is easy to create a large pus (Mikolov et al., 2013; Pennington et al., 2014) can monolingual dataset by collecting data from the substantially improve the performance of sentence classifi- Web, we can train high-capacity models. There- cation and textual similarity systems (Socher et al., 2011; fore, training efficiency becomes a critical issue Tai et al., 2015; Kalchbrenner et al., 2014). Recently, pre- even when using high-performance hardware. In trained contextual representation approaches (Devlin et al., this paper, we explore an efficient training method 2018; Radford et al., 2018; Peters et al., 2018) have been for the state-of-the-art bidirectional Transformer developed and shown to be more effective than conven- (BERT) model. By visualizing the self-attention tional word embedding. Different from word embedding distributions of different layers at different po- that only extracts local semantic information of individual sitions in a well-trained BERT model, we find words, pre-trained contextual representations further learn that in most layers, the self-attention distribution sentence-level information by sentence-level encoders.
    [Show full text]
  • Word Sense Disambiguation with Transformer Models
    Word Sense Disambiguation with Transformer Models Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche Tony Scerri Ron Daniel Jr. Elsevier Labs Elsevier Labs Elsevier Labs Radarweg 29, 1 Appold Street, 230 Park Avenue, Amsterdam 1043 NX, London EC2A 2UT, UK New York, NY, 10169, Netherlands [email protected] USA [email protected] [email protected] Abstract given hypernym. In Subtask 3 the system can use both the sentence and the hypernym in making the In this paper, we tackle the task of Word decision. Sense Disambiguation (WSD). We present our system submitted to the Word-in-Context Tar- The dataset provided with the WiC-TSV chal- get Sense Verification challenge, part of the lenge has relatively few sense annotated examples SemDeep workshop at IJCAI 2020 (Breit et al., (< 4; 000) and with a single target sense per word. 2020). That challenge asks participants to pre- This makes pre-trained Transformer models well dict if a specific mention of a word in a text suited for the task since the small amount of data matches a pre-defined sense. Our approach would limit the learning ability of a typical super- uses pre-trained transformer models such as vised model trained from scratch. BERT that are fine-tuned on the task using different architecture strategies. Our model Thanks to the recent advances made in language achieves the best accuracy and precision on models such as BERT (Devlin et al., 2018) or XL- Subtask 1 – make use of definitions for decid- Net (Yang et al., 2019) trained on large corpora, ing whether the target word in context corre- neural language models have established the state- sponds to the given sense or not.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving the Prosody of RNN-Based English Text-To-Speech Synthesis by Incorporating a BERT Model
    INTERSPEECH 2020 October 25–29, 2020, Shanghai, China Improving the Prosody of RNN-based English Text-To-Speech Synthesis by Incorporating a BERT model Tom Kenter, Manish Sharma, Rob Clark Google UK ftomkenter, skmanish, [email protected] Abstract the pretrained model, whereas it is typically hard for standard parsing methods to resolve this ambiguity. Sentences that are The prosody of currently available speech synthesis systems challenging linguistically (e.g., because they are long or other- can be unnatural due to the systems only having access to the wise difficult to parse) can benefit from the new approach based text, possibly enriched by linguistic information such as part- on BERT representations rather than explicit features, as any of-speech tags and parse trees. We show that incorporating errors in the parse information no longer impair performance. a BERT model in an RNN-based speech synthesis model — where the BERT model is pretrained on large amounts of un- We show that human raters favour CHiVE-BERT over a labeled data, and fine-tuned to the speech domain — improves current state-of-the-art model on three datasets designed to prosody. Additionally, we propose a way of handling arbitrar- highlight different prosodic phenomena. Additionally, we pro- ily long sequences with BERT. Our findings indicate that small pose a way of handling long sequences with BERT (which has BERT models work better than big ones, and that fine-tuning fixed-length inputs and outputs), so it can deal with arbitrarily the BERT part of the model is pivotal for getting good results. long input.
    [Show full text]
  • Recombining Frames and Roles in Frame-Semantic Parsing
    Breeding Fillmore’s Chickens and Hatching the Eggs: Recombining Frames and Roles in Frame-Semantic Parsing Gosse Minnema and Malvina Nissim Center for Language and Cognition University of Groningen, The Netherlands fg.f.minnema, [email protected] Abstract (given a predicate-frame pair, find and label its argu- ments). Some recent systems, such as the LSTM- Frame-semantic parsers traditionally predict based Open-SESAME and (Swayamdipta et al., predicates, frames, and semantic roles in a 2017) or the classical-statistical SEMAFOR (Das fixed order. This paper explores the ‘chicken- et al., 2014), implement the full pipeline, but with a or-egg’ problem of interdependencies between these components theoretically and practically. strong focus specifically on argID. Other models We introduce a flexible BERT-based sequence implement some subset of the components (Tan, labeling architecture that allows for predict- 2007; Hartmann et al., 2017; Yang and Mitchell, ing frames and roles independently from each 2017; Peng et al., 2018), while still implicitly adopt- other or combining them in several ways. ing the pipeline’s philosophy.1 However, little fo- Our results show that our setups can approxi- cus has been given to frame-semantic parsing as mate more complex traditional models’ perfor- an end-to-end task, which entails not only imple- mance, while allowing for a clearer view of the interdependencies between the pipeline’s com- menting the separate components of the pipeline, ponents, and of how frame and role prediction but also looking at their interdependencies. models make different use of BERT’s layers. We highlight such interdependencies from a the- oretical perspective, and investigate them empiri- 1 Introduction cally.
    [Show full text]