%
% GENERATED FROM https://www.coli.uni-saarland.de
%    by   : anonymous
%    IP   : coli2006.lst.uni-saarland.de
%    at   : Mon, 05 Feb 2024 15:43:01 +0100 GMT
%    
% Selection : Author: Shuly_Wintner
%




@InProceedings{Erk_Kruijff:2002,
      AUTHOR = {Erk, Katrin and Kruijff, Geert-Jan M.},
      TITLE = {A Constraint-Programming Approach to Parsing with Resource-Sensitive Categorial Grammar},
      YEAR = {2002},
      BOOKTITLE = {Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Natural Language Understanding and Logic Programming (NLULP'02), July 28},
      EDITOR = {Wintner, Shuly},
      ADDRESS = {Copenhagen, Denmark},
      PUBLISHER = {Computer Science Department, Roskilde University},
      URL = {http://www.cs.haifa.ac.il/~shuly/nlulp02/papers/ErkKruijff.pdf},
      ABSTRACT = {Parsing with resource-sensitive categorial grammars (up to the Lambek-Van Benthem calculus LP) is an NP-complete problem. The traditional approach to parsing with such grammars is based on generate & test and cannot avoid this high worst-case complexity. This paper proposes an alternative approach, based on constraint programming: Given a grammar, constraints formulated on an abstract interpretation of the grammar's logical structure are used to prune the search space during parsing. The approach is provably sound and complete, and reduces the search space in steps that are mostly linear or low-polynomial.},
      ANNOTE = {Erk:2002:CPA}
}

@InProceedings{Holloway King_et_al:2000,
      AUTHOR = {Holloway King, Tracy and Dipper, Stefanie and Frank, Anette and Kuhn, Jonas and Maxwell, John},
      TITLE = {Ambiguity Management in Grammar Writing},
      YEAR = {2000},
      BOOKTITLE = {Proceedings of the Workshop on Linguistic Theory and Grammar Implementation (ESSLLI-2000)},
      PAGES = {5-19},
      EDITOR = {Hinrichs, Erhard and Meurers, Detmar and Wintner, Shuly},
      ADDRESS = {Birmingham, UK},
      URL = {http://www.dfki.de/~frank/papers/ESSLLI00-Dipperetal.ps.gz},
      ABSTRACT = {When lingusitically motivated grammars are implemented on a larger scale, and applied toreal-life corpora, keeping track of ambiguity sources becomes a difficult task. Yet it is of great importance, since unintended ambiguities arising from underrestricted rules or interactions haveto be distinguished from linguistically warranted ambiguities. In this paper we report on various tools in the XLE grammar development platform which can be used for ambiguity managementin grammar writing. In particular, we look at packed representations of ambiguities that allow the grammar writer to view sorted descriptions of ambiguity sources. Also discussed are tools forspecifying desired tree structures and for cutting down the solution space prior to parsing.},
      NOTE = {Revised and extended version to appear 2002 in: Special issue of the Journal of Language and Computation},
      ANNOTE = {COLIURL : King:2000:AMG.pdf King:2000:AMG.ps}
}

@InProceedings{Müller:2000,
      AUTHOR = {Müller, Stefan},
      TITLE = {Continuous or Discontinuous Constituents},
      YEAR = {2000},
      BOOKTITLE = {Proceedings of the ESSLLI'00 Workshop on Linguistic Theory and Grammar Implementation, August 6-18},
      PAGES = {133-152},
      EDITOR = {Hinrichs, Erhard and Meurers, Detmar and Wintner, Shuly},
      ADDRESS = {Birmingham},
      URL = {http://www.dfki.de/~stefan/PS/esslli00.ps},
      ABSTRACT = {In diesem Aufsatz diskutiere ich verschiedene HPSG-Ansätze zur Beschreibung der Konstituentenstellung im Deutschen. Ansätze, die von kontinuierlichen Konstituenten ausgehen, werden mit einem Ansatz, der diskontinuierliche Konstituenten annimmt, verglichen. Die Anzahl der passiven Kanten, die beim Parsen von 24.602 Äußerungen aus dem Verbmobil-Korpus von der Verbmobil-Grammatik erzeugt werden, werden mit der Anzahl der passiven Kanten verglichen, die die Babel-Grammatik erzeugt In this paper I discuss several possibile analyses for constituent order in German. Approaches that assume continuous constituents are compared with an approach that assumes discontinuous constituents. I will show that certain proposals that have been made to analyze constituent order are either not adequate or cannot be implemented with currently availible systems. For the proposals that can be implementd I will discuss the amount of work a parser has to do. I then compare two implementations of larger fragments of German: the Verbmobil grammar and the Babel grammar. It is shown that the amount of work to be done to parse the Verbmobil grammar is significantly higher then the work that has to be done parsing with the Babel grammar.},
      ANNOTE = {COLIURL : Muller:2000:CDC.pdf Muller:2000:CDC.ps}
}