Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A comparative analysis examines encoding methods for constituent parsing, highlighting accuracy and efficiency improvements.
Various encodings have been proposed to cast constituent parsing in terms of a sequence labeling task. However, unlike in the case of dependency parsing, existing comparisons have not been entirely homogeneous and, to the best of our knowledge, there is no systematic evaluation of these encodings under uniform configurations. A homogeneous evaluation needs to account for various aspects that could influence results, either by controlling for these aspects to ensure uniformity (e.g., network architecture, parameter settings, postprocessing of ill-formed output), or by systematically analyzing their impact (e.g., the impact of binary versus arbitrary structures). In this paper, we: (1) compare different encodings comprehensively both theoretically and empirically, on a modern neural architecture and across nine languages, and (2) also introduce new encodings and variants, including an encoding that our analysis finds particularly accurate and compact.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Roca et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: