David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Semantics 4 (3):237-246 (1985)
This paper describes an investigation of the feasibility of resolving anaphors in natural language texts by means of a ‘shallow processing’ approach which exploits knowledge of syntax, semantics and local focussing as heavily as possible; it does not rely on the presence of large amounts of world or domain knowledge, which are notoriously hard to process accurately. The ideas reported are implemented in a program called SPAR (Shallow Processing Anaphor Resolver), which resolves anaphoric ambiguities in simple English stories and generates sentence-by-sentence paraphrases that show what interpretations have been selected. To resolve anaphors, SPAR combines and develops several existing techniques, most notably Sidner's theory of local focussing and Wilks' ‘preference semantics’ theory of semantics and common sense inference Consideration of the need to resolve several anaphors in the same sentence results in Sidner's framework being modified and extended to allow focus-based processing to interact more flexibly with processing based on other types of knowledge. Wilks' treatment of common sense inference is extended to incorporate a wider range of types of inference without jeopardizing its uniformity and simplicity. In the absence of large quantities of world knowledge, successful anaphor resolution is seen to depend on the coordination of predictions made by system components exploiting various knowledge sources. Such coordination normally allows anaphors to be resolved correctly even when no single source of predictions is sufficient on its own
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Michael De Medeiros (2010). Common Sense. Weigl Publishers.
H. Wind Cowles, Matthew Walenski & Robert Kluender (2007). Linguistic and Cognitive Prominence in Anaphor Resolution: Topic, Contrastive Focus and Pronouns. Topoi 26 (1):3-18.
David Thomas (1978). Sociology and Common Sense. Inquiry 21 (1-4):1 – 32.
Jeff Paris (1998). Common Sense and Maximum Entropy. Synthese 117 (1):75-93.
Brian Grant (2001). The Virtues of Common Sense. Philosophy 76 (2):191-209.
Matthew Nudds (2001). Common-Sense and Scientific Psychology. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 1 (2):171-180.
David M. Carter (1990). Control Issues in Anaphor Resolution. Journal of Semantics 7 (4):435-454.
Robert C. Cummins (1992). Cross Domain Inference and Problem Embedding. In Robert E. Cummins & John L. Pollock (eds.), Philosophy and AI: Essays at the Interface. MIT Press
Renia Gasparatou (2009). Moore and Wittgenstein on Common Sense. Philosophical Inquiry 31 (3-4):65-75.
P. D. Magnus (2008). Demonstrative Induction and the Skeleton of Inference. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (3):303 – 315.
Jennifer Keefe (2007). Ferrier, Common Sense and Consciousness. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 5 (2):169-185.
Added to index2010-09-02
Total downloads2 ( #657,719 of 1,790,186 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #427,637 of 1,790,186 )
How can I increase my downloads?