1999
DOI: 10.1007/s100320050018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Recognizing acronyms and their definitions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
57
0
1

Year Published

2001
2001
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 82 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
1
57
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…There is also a similarity between the current work and work reported in Taghva and Gilbreth (1995) on using approximate string matching methods to induce interpretations of acronyms or letter sequences from their full word expansions found somewhere in the immediate context of the given letter sequence. Thus, from a text such as today, leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) met in Brussels .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…There is also a similarity between the current work and work reported in Taghva and Gilbreth (1995) on using approximate string matching methods to induce interpretations of acronyms or letter sequences from their full word expansions found somewhere in the immediate context of the given letter sequence. Thus, from a text such as today, leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) met in Brussels .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…One of the earliest acronym identification systems (Taghva and Gilbreth, 1999) is AFP (Acronym Finding Program). The AFP system first identifies candidate acronyms, which the authors define as uppercase words of three to ten letters.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The task is to identify the 'authentic' long-form in the textual fragment if any. Existing methods for solving this problem can be categorized into three groups: using heuristics and/or scoring rules (Adar, 2004;Ao et al, 2005;Schwartz et al, 2003;Taghva et al, 1999;Wren et al, 2002;Yu et al, 2002); machine learning (Chang et al, 2006;Pakhomov, 2002;Nadeau et al, 2005); and statistics (Hisamitsu et al, 2001;Liu et al, 2003).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%