We propose a method for automatically identifying rhetorical relations. We use supervised machine learning but exploit cue phrases to automatically extract and label training data. Our models draw on a variety of linguistic cues to distinguish between the relations. We show that these feature-rich models outperform the previously suggested bigram models by more than 20%, at least for small training sets. Our approach is therefore better suited to deal with relations for which it is difficult to automatically label a lot of training data because they are rarely signalled by unambiguous cue phrases (e.g., Continuation).
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Using Variability to Guide Dimensional Weighting: Associative Mechanisms in Early Word Learning.Keith S. Apfelbaum & Bob McMurray - 2011 - Cognitive Science 35 (6):1105-1138.
Integrating Cues in Speech Perception.Dominic W. Massaro - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):275-275.
Data Meet Theory: Up Close and Inferentially Personal.Ioannis Votsis - 2011 - Synthese 182 (1):89 - 100.
Redundancy in Perceptual and Linguistic Experience: Comparing Feature-Based and Distributional Models of Semantic Representation.Brian Riordan & Michael N. Jones - 2011 - Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (2):303-345.
Supplementing Entity Coherence with Local Rhetorical Relations for Information Ordering.Nikiforos Karamanis - 2007 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 16 (4):445-464.
Identification of Rhetorical Roles for Segmentation and Summarization of a Legal Judgment.M. Saravanan & B. Ravindran - 2010 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (1):45-76.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #696,863 of 2,169,334 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #345,568 of 2,169,334 )
How can I increase my downloads?