81
Computational Discourse 11-711 Algorithms for NLP 7 December 2017

Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    4

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

ComputationalDiscourse

11-711AlgorithmsforNLP7 December2017

Page 2: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

WhatIsDiscourse?

Discourse isthecoherentstructureoflanguageabovethelevelofsentencesorclauses.Adiscourseisacoherentstructuredgroupofsentences.

Whatmakesapassagecoherent?

Apracticalanswer:Ithasmeaningfulconnectionsbetweenitsutterances.

Page 3: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

CoverofShel Silverstein’sWheretheSidewalkEnds (1974)

Page 4: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

ApplicationsofComputationalDiscourse

• Automaticessaygrading• Automaticsummarization• Meetingunderstanding• Dialoguesystems

Page 5: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Kindsofdiscourseanalysis

• Discourse,monologue,dialogue,(conversation)

• Discourse(SLP Ch.21)vs.(Spoken)DialogueSystems(SLP Ch.24)

Page 6: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Discoursemechanismsvs.Coherenceofthought

• “Longer-range”analysis(discourse)vs.“deeper”analysis(realsemantics):– JohnboughtacarfromBill– BillsoldacartoJohn– Theywerebothhappywiththetransaction

Page 7: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Coherence,Cohesion• Coherencerelations:– JohnhidBill’scarkeys.Hewasdrunk.– JohnhidBill’scarkeys.Helikesspinach.

• Entity-basedcoherence(Centering)andlexicalcohesion:– Johnwenttothestoretobuyapiano– Hehadgonetothestoreformanyyears– Hewasexcitedthathecouldfinallyaffordapiano– Hearrivedjustasthestorewasclosingforthedayversus– Johnwenttothestoretobuyapiano– Itwasastorehehadgonetoformanyyears– Hewasexcitedthathecouldfinallyaffordapiano– ItwasclosingforthedayjustasJohnarrived

Page 8: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

CohesioninNLP

Page 9: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

DiscourseSegmentation

Goal:Givenrawtext,separateadocumentintoalinearsequenceofsubtopics.

Pyramidfromcommons.wikimedia.org

Page 10: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Discoursesegmentation:TextTiling

• Usingdipsincohesion tosegmenttext.

Page 11: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

SupervisedDiscourseSegmentation

Ourinstances:placemarkersbetweensentences(orparagraphsorclauses)Ourlabels:yes(markerisadiscourseboundary)orno(markerisnotadiscourseboundary)Whatfeaturesshouldweuse?• Discoursemarkersorcuewords• Wordoverlapbefore/afterboundary• Numberofcoreferencechainsthatcrossboundary• Others?

Page 12: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

CoherenceinNLP

Page 13: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

CoherenceRelationsS1:JohnwenttothebanktodeposithispaycheckS2:HethentookabustoBill’scardealershipS3:HeneededtobuyacarS4:Thecompanyheworksfornowisn’tnearabuslineS5:HealsowantedtotalkwithBillabouttheirsoccerleague

Page 14: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

SomeCoherenceRelationsHowcanwelabeltherelationshipsbetweenutterancesinadiscourse?Afewexamples:• Explanation:InferthatthestateoreventassertedbyS1 causesorcouldcausethestateoreventassertedbyS0.

• Occasion:AchangeofstatecanbeinferredfromtheassertionofS0,whosefinalstatecanbeinferredfromS1,orviceversa.

• Parallel:Inferp(a1,a2,…) fromtheassertionofS0andp(b1,b2,…) fromtheassertionofS1,whereaiandbi aresimilarforalli.

Page 15: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

RSTCoherenceRelations

Page 16: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

RSTformalrelationdefinition

• Relationname:Evidence• Constr onN:RnotbelievingNenoughforW• Constr onS:RbelievesS,orwould• Constr onN+S:R’sbelievingSwouldincreaseR’sbelievingN

• Effects:R’sbeliefofNisincreased

Page 17: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

AutomaticCoherenceAssignment

Givenasequenceofsentencesorclauses,wewanttoautomatically:• determinecoherencerelationsbetweenthem(coherencerelationassignment)

• extractatreeorgraphrepresentinganentirediscourse(discourseparsing)

Page 18: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

AutomaticCoherenceAssignment

Verydifficult.Oneexistingapproachistousecuephrases.

JohnhidBill’scarkeysbecause hewasdrunk.Thescarecrowcametoaskforabrain.Similarly,the

tinmanwantsaheart.1) Identifycuephrasesinthetext.2) Segmentthetextintodiscoursesegments.3) Classifytherelationshipbetweeneach

consecutivediscoursesegment.

Page 19: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

AutomaticCoherenceAssignment

• “Discourseparsing”?• Usecuephrases/discoursemarkers– although,but,because,yet,with,…– butoftenimplicit,asincarkeyexample

• Useabduction,defeasibleinference– Allmenaremortal–Maxwasmortal–MaybeMaxwasaman

• Thecitydeniedthedemonstratorsapermitbecausethey(feared/advocated)violence

Page 20: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Pragmatics

Page 21: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Pragmatics

Pragmaticsisabranchoflinguisticsdealingwithlanguageuseincontext.

Whenadiplomatsaysyes,hemeans‘perhaps’;Whenhesaysperhaps,hemeans‘no’;Whenhesaysno,heisnotadiplomat.

(VariouslyattributedtoVoltaire,H.L.Mencken,andCarlJung)

Quotefromhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatics/

Page 22: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

InContext?

• Socialcontext– Socialidentities,relationships,andsetting

• Physicalcontext–Where?Whatobjectsarepresent?Whatactions?

• Linguisticcontext– Conversationhistory

• Otherformsofcontext– Sharedknowledge,etc.

Page 23: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

SpeechActs

Page 24: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

(Direct) Speech Acts

• Mood of a sentence indicates relation between speaker and the concept (proposition) defined by the LF

• There can be operators that represent these relations:

• ASSERT: the proposition is proposed as a fact

• YN-QUERY: the truth of the proposition is queried

• COMMAND: the proposition describes a requested action

• WH-QUERY: the proposition describes an object to be identified

Page 25: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Indirect Speech Acts

• Can you pass the salt?

• It’s warm in here.

Page 26: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Austin,Howtodothingswithwords

• Inadditiontojustsayingthings,sentencesperformactions.

• Whenthesesentencesareuttered,theimportantthingisnottheirtruthvalue,butthefelicitousness oftheaction (e.g.,doyouhavetheauthority todoit):– InamethisshiptheQueenElizabeth.– Itakethismantobemyhusband.– Ibequeaththiswatchtomybrother.– Ideclarewar.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._L._Austin

Page 27: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Performative sentences• Youcantellwhethersentencesareperformativebyadding“hereby”:– IherebynamethisshiptheQueenElizabeth.– I herebytakethismantobemyhusband.– Iherebybequeaththiswatchtomybrother.– Iherebydeclarewar.

• Non-performative sentencesdonotsoundgoodwithhereby:– Birdsherebysing.– ThereisherebyfightinginSyria.

Page 28: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Austincontinued

• Locution:saysomewords• Illocution:anactionperformedin sayingwords– Ask,promise,command

• Perlocution:anactionperformedby sayingwords,probablytheeffectthatanillocutionhasonthelistener.– Persuade,convince,scare,elicitananswer,etc.

Page 29: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Searle’sspeechactsSearle(1975) hassetupthefollowingclassificationofillocutionaryspeechacts:

• assertives =speechactsthatcommitaspeakertothetruthoftheexpressed proposition,e.g.recitinga creed

• directives =speechactsthataretocausethehearertotakeaparticularaction,e.g.requests,commandsandadvice

• commissives =speechactsthatcommitaspeakertosomefutureaction,e.g.promisesandoaths

• expressives =speechactsthatexpressthespeaker'sattitudesandemotionstowardstheproposition,e.g.congratulations,excusesandthanks

• declarations =speechactsthatchangetherealityinaccordwiththepropositionofthedeclaration,e.g.baptisms,pronouncingsomeoneguiltyorpronouncingsomeonehusbandandwife

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_act

Page 30: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Searleexample

• Indirectspeechacts:– Canyoupassthesalt?• Hastheformofaquestion,buttheeffectofadirective.

Page 31: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

SpeechActsinNLP

Page 32: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Task-OrientedDialogue

• Makingtravelreservations(flight,hotelroom,etc.)

• Schedulingameeting.• Taskorienteddialoguesthatarefrequentlydonewithcomputers:– Findingoutwhenthenextbusis.–Makingapaymentoverthephone.

Page 33: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Waystoaskforaroom

• I’dliketomakeareservation• I’mcallingtomakeareservation• Doyouhaveavacancyon...• CanIreservearoom• Isitpossibletoreservearoom

Page 34: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Domain-specificspeechacts:travelscheduling(NESPOLE!Project)

(aprimitiveversionofthespeechtranslation)

• 61.2.3olangITAlangITAPrvIRST“Telefonoperprenotaredellestanzeperquattro colleghi”

• 61.2.3olang ITAlang ENGPrv IRST“Iamcallingtobooksomeroomsforfourcolleagues”

• 61.2.3IFPrv IRSTc:request-action+reservation+room (room-spec=(room,quantity=some),for-whom=(colleague,quantity=4))

• comments:dial-oo5-spkB-roca0-02-3

Page 35: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Task-orienteddialogueactsrelatedtonegotiation

• Suggest– Irecommendthishotel.

• Offer– Icansendsomebrochures.– HowaboutifIsendsomebrochures.

• Accept– Sure.Thatsoundsfine.

• Reject– No.Idon’tlikethatone.

Page 36: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University
Page 37: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

ExamplesofSpeechActinventoriesusedinlanguagetechnologies

• Theseinventoriesareactuallyannotationschemes.

• Theyareusedforcorpusannotation.• Thecorpusannotationisusedforautomatedlearning.

• Theyarehighlydevelopedandcheckedforintercoder agreement.– Butstilltakealongtimetolearn.

Page 38: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Examplesoftask-orientedspeechacts• Identifyself:

– ThisisLori– MynameisLori– I’mLori– Lorihere

• Soundcheck:Canyouhearme?• Metadialogueact:Thereisaproblem.• Greet:Hello.• Request-information:–Whereareyougoing.– Tellmewhereyouaregoing.

Page 39: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Examplesoftask-orientedspeechacts• Backchannel:– Soundsyoumaketoindicatethatyouarestilllistening– ok,m-hm

• Apologize/replytoapology• Thank/replytothanks• Requestverification/Verify– Sothat’s2:00?Yes.2:00.

• Resumetopic– Backtotheaccommodations….

• Answerayes/noquestion:yes,no.

Page 40: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

DAMSLDialogueActMarkupinSeveralLayers

• Fortask-orientedornon-task-orienteddialogue.• However,muchofthedevelopmentwasrelatedtotask-

orienteddialogues:– Trainscorpus– Maptask corpus– Meetingschedulingcorpus

• Althoughithasbeenusedfornon-task-orienteddialogue:– Switchboardcorpus(JHUworkshop1997)– SpanishCallHome corpus(ClarityProject,Waibel,Levin,Lavie)– Textmessagecorpus(Proprietaryproject,Levin,Rudnicky,Tenny)

• Whatarethelayers?– Forwardfunction:offer,ask– Backwardfunction:backchannel,accept,reject

Page 41: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Forwardlookingfunctions• Statement

– Assert– Reassert– Other-statement

• Influencing-addressee-future-action– Open-option– Action-directive

• Info-request• Committing-speaker-future-action

– Offer– Commit

• ConventionalOpeningClosing• Explicit-performative• Exclamation• Other-forward-function

Page 42: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Backwardlookingfunctions• Agreement

– Accept– Acceptpart– Maybe– Rejectpart– Reject– Hold

• Understanding– Signalnon-understanding– Signalunderstanding

• Acknowledge• Repeat• Complete

– Correctmisspeaking• Answer

Page 43: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Now,afamousbadidea(linkedtoagoodidea)

Page 44: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Grice’sMaxims

• Whydothesemakesense?– Areyou21?– Yes.I’m25.

– I’mhungry.– I’llgetmykeys.

–WherecanIgetcigarettes?– Thereisagasstationacrossthestreet.

Page 45: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Grice’sMaxims• Whyarethesestrange?

– (Thestudentsareallgirls.)– Somestudentsaregirls.

– (Therearesevennon-stopflights.)– Therearethreenon-stopflights.

• Jurafsky andMartin,page820

– (Inaletterofrecommendationforajob)– Istronglypraisetheapplicant’simpeccablehandwriting.

Page 46: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Grice’sCooperativePrinciple

• “Makeyourcontributionsuchasitisrequired,atthestageatwhichitoccurs,bytheacceptedpurposeordirectionofthetalkexchangeinwhichyouareengaged.”

• TheCooperativePrincipleisgoodandright.

• Ontheotherhand,wehavetheMaxims:

Page 47: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Grice’sactualMaxims• MaximofQuality

– Trytosaysomethingtrue;donotsaysomethingfalseorforwhichyoulackevidence.

• MaximofQuantity– Sayasmuchasisrequiredtobeinformative– Donotmakeyourcontributionmoreinformativethanrequired

• MaximofRelevance– BeRelevant

• MaximofManner– Beperspicuous– Avoidambigtuity– Bebrief– Beorderly

Page 48: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Flouting theCooperativePrinciple

• “Nicethrow.”(saidafterterriblethrow)

• “Ifyourunalittleslower,you’llnevercatchuptotheball.”(duringmediocrepursuitofball)

• Youcan indeedimplysomethingbyclearlyviolatingtheprinciple.– TheMaximsstill suck.

Page 49: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Flout ≠Flaunt

• Flout:openlydisregard(arule,laworconvention).

• Flaunt:display(something)ostentatiously,especiallyinordertoprovokeenvyoradmirationortoshowdefiance.– Source:Google

Page 50: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

MypaperontheMaxims

• Grice'sMaxims:"DotheRightThing" byRobertE.Frederking.ArguesthattheGricean maximsaretoovaguetobeusefulfornaturallanguageprocessing.[fromWikipediaarticle]

• “Iusedtothinkyouwereaniceguy.”– Actualquotefromagradstudent,afterreadingthepaper

Page 51: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Referenceresolution

Page 52: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

ReferenceResolution:example• VictoriaChen,CFOofMegabucksBankingCorpsince2004,sawherpay jump20%,to$1.3million,asthe37-year-oldalsobecametheDenver-basedcompany’spresident.Ithasbeentenyearssinceshe cametoMegabucks fromrivalLotsaloot.

• Shouldgive4coreference chains:– {VictoriaChen,CFOofMegabucksBankingCorpsince2004,her,the37-year-old,theDenver-basedcompany’spresident,she}

– {MegabucksBankingCorp,theDenver-basedcompany,Megabucks}

– {herpay}– {Lotsaloot}.

Page 53: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

CoreferenceResolution

Marypickeduptheball.Shethrewittome.

Page 54: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Referenceresolution

Marypickeduptheball.Shethrewittome.

Page 55: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

(Co)ReferenceResolution

• Determiningthereferentofareferringexpression.Anaphora,antecedentscorefer.

• 1961FordFalcon:it,this,that,thiscar,thecar,theFord,theFalcon,myfriend’scar,…

• Coreference chainsarepartofcohesion• Note:otherkindsofreferents:– AccordingtoDoug,SuejustboughttheFordFalcon• Butthat turnedouttobealie• Butthat wasfalse• That struckmeasafunnywaytodescribethesituation• That causedafinancialproblemforSue

Page 56: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

TypesofReferringExpressions• IndefiniteNPs:a/an,some,this,ornothing– newentities;specific/non-specificambiguity

• DefiniteNPs:usuallythe– anentityidentifiablebythehearer

• Pronouns:he,them,it,etc.Alsocataphora.– strongconstraintsontheiruse– canbebound:Everystudentimprovedhisgrades

• Demonstratives:this,that• Names:construedtobeunique,buttheyaren’t– IsthattheBobinLTIortheBobintheLaneCenter?

Page 57: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Informationstructure:given/new

• Wherearemyshoes?Yourshoes areinthecloset• What’sinthecloset?– ??Yourshoes areinthecloset.– Yourshoes areinthecloset.

• Definiteness/pronoun,length,positioninS

Page 58: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Complications

• Inferrables:Somecar.…adoor…theengine…• Generics:AtCMUyouhavetoworkhard.• Pleonastic/clefts/extraposition:– Itisraining.Itwasmewhocalled.Itwasgoodthat…

Page 59: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

ReferenceResolution

Goal:determinewhatentitiesarereferredtobywhichlinguisticexpressions.

Thediscoursemodelcontainsoureligiblesetofreferents.

Page 60: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Pronouns:FiltersandPreferences

Page 61: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Pronounreferenceresolution:filters

• Agreementinnumber,person,gender• Pittsburghdialect:yinz=youse=y’all• UKdialect:Newcastleareaphysicalteam.

– Lcanhave>2numbers,>3persons,or>3genders• Bindingtheory:reflexive required/prohibited:– JohnboughthimselfanewFord.[himself=John]– JohnboughthimanewFord.[him!=John]– JohnsaidthatBillboughthimanewFord.[him!=Bill]– JsaidthatBboughthimselfanewF.[himself=Bill]– HesaidthatheboughtJanewFord.[both he!=J]

Page 62: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Pronounreferenceresolution:preferences• Recency:preferenceformostrecentreferent• GrammaticalRole:subj>obj>others– BillywenttothebarwithJim.Heorderedrum.

• Repeatedmention:Billyhadbeendrinkingfordays.Hewenttothebaragaintoday.Jimwentwithhim.Heorderedrum.

• Parallelism:JohnwentwithJimtoonebar.Billwentwithhimtoanother.

• Verbsemantics:Johnphoned/criticizedBill.Helostthelaptop.

• Selectional restrictions:Johnparkedhiscarinthegarageafterdrivingitaroundforhours.

Page 63: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Threecomputationalapproachestopronouns

Page 64: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

PNref.res.1:HobbsAlgorithm

• Algorithmforwalkingthroughparsesofcurrentandprecedingsentences

• Simple,oftenusedasbaseline

• Requiresparser,morphgenderandnumber– plusheadrulesandWordNet forNPgender

• Implementsbindingtheory,recency,andgrammaticalrolepreferences

Page 65: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

PNref.res.2:Centeringtheory• Claim:asingleentityis“centered”ineachS• Backward-lookingcenter,Forward-lookingcenters• Cb =mosthighlyrankedCf usedfromprev.S• Rank:Subj>ExistPredNom>Obj>IndObj-Obl>DemAdvPP

• Definedtransitions:(Cp isfrontofCf list)

Rule1:IfanyCf usedasPron+1,thenCb(n+1) mustbeProtooRule2:Rank:Continue>Retain>Smooth>Rough

Page 66: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

U1:JohnsawaFordatthedealershipCb:NILCf:John,Ford,dealership

U2:HeshowedittoBob[Bob!=he]He=John,it={Ford,dealership}Cb=John• (it->Ford)=>Cf:{John,Ford,Bob}=>CONTINUE[tie-winner]• (it->dealership)=>Cf:{John,dealer,Bob}=>CONTINUE

U3:Heboughtit[dealership isnowunavailable]He={John,Bob},it=Ford• (he->John)=>Cb=John,Cf={John,Ford}=>CONTINUE[Win]• (he->Bob)=>Cb=Bob,Cf={Bob,Ford}=>SMOOTH

Page 67: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Centeringtheory

• SamerequirementsasHobbs• ImplementsGrammaticalRole,Recency,andRepeatedMention

• Canmakemistakes:– Bobopenedanewdealershiplastweek– JohntookalookattheFordsinhislot[Cb=Bob]– Heendedupbuyingone• He=Bob=>CONTINUE,He=John=>SMOOTH

Page 68: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

PNref.res.3:Log-linearmodel

• Supervised:hand-labelled coref corpus• Rule-basedfilteringofnon-referentialpronouns• Features,valuesforHe inU3:

Page 69: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

GeneralReferenceResolution

Page 70: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

GeneralCoreference Resolution• VictoriaChen,CFOofMegabucksBankingCorpsince2004,sawherpay jump20%,to$1.3million,asthe37-year-oldalsobecametheDenver-basedcompany’spresident.Ithasbeentenyearssinceshe cametoMegabucks fromrivalLotsaloot.

• Shouldgive4coreference chains:– {VictoriaChen,CFOofMegabucksBankingCorpsince2004,her,the37-year-old,theDenver-basedcompany’spresident,she}

– {MegabucksBankingCorp,theDenver-basedcompany,Megabucks}

– {herpay}– {Lotsaloot}.

Page 71: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

President Park Geun-hye of South Korea ordered the country’s military on Monday to deliver a strong and immediate response to any North Korean provocation, the latest turn in a war of words that has become a test of resolve for the relatively unproven leaders in both the North and South.“I consider the current North Korean threats very serious,” Ms. Park told the South’s generals. “If the North attempts any provocation against our people and country, you must respond strongly at the first contact with them without any political consideration.“As top commander of the military, I trust your judgment in the face of North Korea’s unexpected surprise provocation,” she added.Since Kim Jong-un took power after the death of his father, Kim Jong-il, in late 2011, the North has taken a series of provocative steps and amplified threats against Washington and Seoul to much louder and more menacing levels. The North has launched a three-stage rocket, tested a nuclear device and threatened to hit major American cities with nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. And Mr. Kim has declared that the Korean Peninsula has reverted to a “state of war.”

Page 72: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

President Park Geun-hye of South Korea ordered the country’s military on Monday to deliver a strong and immediate response to any North Korean provocation, the latest turn in a war of words that has become a test of resolve for the relatively unproven leaders in both the North and South.“I consider the current North Korean threats very serious,” Ms. Park told the South’s generals. “If the North attempts any provocation against our people and country, you must respond strongly at the first contact with them without any political consideration.“As top commander of the military, I trust your judgment in the face of North Korea’s unexpected surprise provocation,” she added.Since Kim Jong-un took power after the death of his father, Kim Jong-il, in late 2011, the North has taken a series of provocative steps and amplified threats against Washington and Seoul to much louder and more menacing levels. The North has launched a three-stage rocket, tested a nuclear device and threatened to hit major American cities with nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. And Mr. Kim has declared that the Korean Peninsula has reverted to a “state of war.”

Page 73: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

President Park Geun-hye of South Korea ordered the country’s military on Monday to deliver a strong and immediate response to any North Korean provocation, the latest turn in a war of words that has become a test of resolve for the relatively unproven leaders in both the North and South.“I consider the current North Korean threats very serious,” Ms. Park told the South’s generals. “If the North attempts any provocation against our people and country, you must respond strongly at the first contact with them without any political consideration.“As top commander of the military, I trust your judgment in the face of North Korea’s unexpected surprise provocation,” she added.Since Kim Jong-un took power after the death of his father, Kim Jong-il, in late 2011, the North has taken a series of provocative steps and amplified threats against Washington and Seoul to much louder and more menacing levels. The North has launched a three-stage rocket, tested a nuclear device and threatened to hit major American cities with nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. And Mr. Kim has declared that the Korean Peninsula has reverted to a “state of war.”

Page 74: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

President Park Geun-hye of South Korea ordered the country’s military on Monday to deliver a strong and immediate response to any North Korean provocation, the latest turn in a war of words that has become a test of resolve for the relatively unproven leaders in both the North and South.“I consider the current North Korean threats very serious,” Ms. Park told the South’s generals. “If the North attempts any provocation against our people and country, you must respond strongly at the first contact with them without any political consideration.“As top commander of the military, I trust your judgment in the face of North Korea’s unexpected surprise provocation,” she added.Since Kim Jong-un took power after the death of his father, Kim Jong-il, in late 2011, the North has taken a series of provocative steps and amplified threats against Washington and Seoul to much louder and more menacing levels. The North has launched a three-stage rocket, tested a nuclear device and threatened to hit major American cities with nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. And Mr. Kim has declared that the Korean Peninsula has reverted to a “state of war.”

Page 75: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

President Park Geun-hye of South Korea ordered the country’s military on Monday to deliver a strong and immediate response to any North Korean provocation, the latest turn in a war of words that has become a test of resolve for the relatively unproven leaders in both the North and South.“I consider the current North Korean threats very serious,” Ms. Park told the South’s generals. “If the North attempts any provocation against our people and country, you must respond strongly at the first contact with them without any political consideration.“As top commander of the military, I trust your judgment in the face of North Korea’s unexpected surprise provocation,” she added.Since Kim Jong-un took power after the death of his father, Kim Jong-il, in late 2011, the North has taken a series of provocative steps and amplified threats against Washington and Seoul to much louder and more menacing levels. The North has launched a three-stage rocket, tested a nuclear device and threatened to hit major American cities with nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. And Mr. Kim has declared that the Korean Peninsula has reverted to a “state of war.”

Page 76: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

High-LevelRecipeforCoreferenceResolution

1. ParsethetextandidentifyNPs;then2. ForeverypairofNPs,carryoutbinary

classification:coreferential ornot?3. Collecttheresultsintocoreferential chains

Whatdoweneed?-Achoiceofclassifier-Lotsoflabeleddata-Features

Page 77: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Features?• EditdistancebetweenthetwoNPs• ArethetwoNPsthesameNERtype?• Appositivesyntax– “AlanShepherd,thefirstAmericanastronaut…”

• Proper/definite/indefinite/pronoun• Gender• Number• Distanceinsentences• NumberofNPsbetween• Grammaticalrole• etc.

Page 78: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

MoreCoreference Resolution

• Combinebest:ENCORE(BoLinetal2010)• MLforCross-DocCoref (Rushin Shahetal2011)

Page 79: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

EntityLinking

Apple updateditsinvestorrelationspagetodaytonotethatitwillannounceitsearningsforthesecondfiscalquarter(firstcalendarquarter)of2015onMonday,April27.

Newstextfromhttp://www.macrumors.com/2015/03/30/apple-to-announce-q2-2015-earnings-on-april-27/

Page 80: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

OneApproachtoEntityLinking

Usesupervisedlearning:Trainonknownreferencestoeachentity.Usefeaturesfromcontext(bagofwords,syntax,etc.).

Page 81: Computational Discourse F17 - Carnegie Mellon University

Questions?