Proceedings of the CoNLL-16 Shared Task 2016
DOI: 10.18653/v1/k16-2007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Robust Non-Explicit Neural Discourse Parser in English and Chinese

Abstract: Neural discourse models proposed so far are very sophisticated and tuned specifically to certain label sets. These are effective, but unwieldy to deploy or repurpose for different label sets or languages. Here, we propose a robust neural classifier for non-explicit discourse relations for both English and Chinese in CoNLL 2016 Shared Task datasets. Our model only requires word vectors and simple feed-forward training procedure, which we have previously shown to work better than some of the more sophisticated n… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The experiments are conducted on two datasets, the PDTB 2.0 (Prasad et al, 2008) and the CoNLL-2016 shared task (CoNLL16) (Xue et al, 2016), to validate the performance of our method. Both contain the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) articles, and the difference is the annotation and relation senses.…”
Section: Datasetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The experiments are conducted on two datasets, the PDTB 2.0 (Prasad et al, 2008) and the CoNLL-2016 shared task (CoNLL16) (Xue et al, 2016), to validate the performance of our method. Both contain the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) articles, and the difference is the annotation and relation senses.…”
Section: Datasetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most state-of-the-art research in discourse analysis specifically has focused on classifying the discourse relations between pairs of clauses, as is practice in the Penn Discourse Treebank (PDTB) (Prasad et al, 2008) and Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) dataset (Carlson et al, 2003). Corpora and methods have been developed to predict explicit discourse connectives (Miltsakaki et al, 2004;Lin et al, 2009;Das et al, 2018;Malmi et al, 2018;Wang et al, 2018) as well as implicit discourse relations (Rutherford and Xue, 2016;Liu et al, 2016;Lan et al, 2017;Lei et al, 2017). Choubey et al ( 2020) built a news article corpus where each sentence was labeled with a discourse label defined in Van Dijk schema (Van Dijk, 2013).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most state-of-the-art research in discourse analysis has focused on classifying the discourse relations between pairs of clauses, as is practice in the Penn Discourse Treebank (PDTB) (Prasad et al, 2008) and Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) dataset (Carlson et al, 2003). Corpora and methods have been developed to predict explicit discourse connectives (Miltsakaki et al, 2004;Lin et al, 2009;Das et al, 2018;Malmi et al, 2017;Wang et al, 2018) as well as implicit discourse re-lations (Rutherford and Xue, 2016;Liu et al, 2016;Lan et al, 2017;Lei et al, 2017). Choubey et al ( 2020) built a news article corpus where each sentence was tagged with a discourse label defined in Van Dijk schema (Van Dijk, 2013).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%