You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Mike's argument marking doesn't capture optional vs. obligatory. For example, determiners are treated as non-arguments: thus there's no notion of repeated determiners being bad. But this is unlikely to hurt Mike [Collins], because [he uses a discriminative model and] repeated determiners don't show up in the text. That's why using a smoothed model to actually parse [rather than looking at generative probability] would be a fairer evaluation ... at least for the supervised case.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
[item from the old TO-DO file dated 2002-04-07]
Mike's argument marking doesn't capture optional vs. obligatory. For example, determiners are treated as non-arguments: thus there's no notion of repeated determiners being bad. But this is unlikely to hurt Mike [Collins], because [he uses a discriminative model and] repeated determiners don't show up in the text. That's why using a smoothed model to actually parse [rather than looking at generative probability] would be a fairer evaluation ... at least for the supervised case.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: