Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This paper examines the Stanford typed dependencies representation, which was designed to provide a straightforward description of grammatical relations for any user who could benefit from automatic text understanding. For such purposes, we argue that dependency schemes must follow a simple design and provide semantically contentful information, as well as offer an automatic procedure to extract the relations. We consider the underlying design principles of the Stanford scheme from this perspective, and compare it to the GR and PARC representations. Finally, we address the question of the suitability of the Stanford scheme for parser evaluation.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Marie-Catherine de Marneffe
Christopher D. Manning
Stanford University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Marneffe et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0a4fa8839f3dcd48b4eaed — DOI: https://doi.org/10.3115/1608858.1608859
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: