Concordance

Query A92-1026 15 (480.2 per million)

tech,6-1-A92-1026,ak	It is often assumed that when <term> natural language processing </term> meets the real world , the ideal of aiming for complete and correct <term> interpretations </term> has to be abandoned .	#22373 It is often assumed that whennatural language processing meets the real world, the ideal of aiming for complete and correct interpretations has to be abandoned.
other,22-1-A92-1026,ak	It is often assumed that when <term> natural language processing </term> meets the real world , the ideal of aiming for complete and correct <term> interpretations </term> has to be abandoned .	#22389 It is often assumed that when natural language processing meets the real world, the ideal of aiming for complete and correctinterpretations has to be abandoned.
tool,5-2-A92-1026,ak	However , our experience with <term> TACITUS </term> ; especially in the <term> MUC-3 evaluation </term> , has shown that principled techniques for <term> syntactic and pragmatic analysis </term> can be bolstered with methods for achieving <term> robustness </term> .	#22400 However, our experience withTACITUS; especially in the MUC-3 evaluation, has shown that principled techniques for syntactic and pragmatic analysis can be bolstered with methods for achieving robustness.
other,10-2-A92-1026,ak	However , our experience with <term> TACITUS </term> ; especially in the <term> MUC-3 evaluation </term> , has shown that principled techniques for <term> syntactic and pragmatic analysis </term> can be bolstered with methods for achieving <term> robustness </term> .	#22405 However, our experience with TACITUS; especially in theMUC-3 evaluation, has shown that principled techniques for syntactic and pragmatic analysis can be bolstered with methods for achieving robustness.
tech,19-2-A92-1026,ak	However , our experience with <term> TACITUS </term> ; especially in the <term> MUC-3 evaluation </term> , has shown that principled techniques for <term> syntactic and pragmatic analysis </term> can be bolstered with methods for achieving <term> robustness </term> .	#22414 However, our experience with TACITUS; especially in the MUC-3 evaluation, has shown that principled techniques forsyntactic and pragmatic analysis can be bolstered with methods for achieving robustness.
other,30-2-A92-1026,ak	However , our experience with <term> TACITUS </term> ; especially in the <term> MUC-3 evaluation </term> , has shown that principled techniques for <term> syntactic and pragmatic analysis </term> can be bolstered with methods for achieving <term> robustness </term> .	#22425 However, our experience with TACITUS; especially in the MUC-3 evaluation, has shown that principled techniques for syntactic and pragmatic analysis can be bolstered with methods for achievingrobustness.
tech,6-3-A92-1026,ak	We describe three techniques for making <term> syntactic analysis </term> more robust --- an <term> agenda-based scheduling parser </term> , a <term> recovery technique </term> for failed <term> parses </term> , and a new technique called <term> terminal substring parsing </term> .	#22433 We describe three techniques for makingsyntactic analysis more robust---an agenda-based scheduling parser, a recovery technique for failed parses, and a new technique called terminal substring parsing.
tech,12-3-A92-1026,ak	We describe three techniques for making <term> syntactic analysis </term> more robust --- an <term> agenda-based scheduling parser </term> , a <term> recovery technique </term> for failed <term> parses </term> , and a new technique called <term> terminal substring parsing </term> .	#22439 We describe three techniques for making syntactic analysis more robust---anagenda-based scheduling parser, a recovery technique for failed parses, and a new technique called terminal substring parsing.
tech,17-3-A92-1026,ak	We describe three techniques for making <term> syntactic analysis </term> more robust --- an <term> agenda-based scheduling parser </term> , a <term> recovery technique </term> for failed <term> parses </term> , and a new technique called <term> terminal substring parsing </term> .	#22444 We describe three techniques for making syntactic analysis more robust---an agenda-based scheduling parser, arecovery technique for failed parses, and a new technique called terminal substring parsing.
other,21-3-A92-1026,ak	We describe three techniques for making <term> syntactic analysis </term> more robust --- an <term> agenda-based scheduling parser </term> , a <term> recovery technique </term> for failed <term> parses </term> , and a new technique called <term> terminal substring parsing </term> .	#22448 We describe three techniques for making syntactic analysis more robust---an agenda-based scheduling parser, a recovery technique for failedparses, and a new technique called terminal substring parsing.
tech,28-3-A92-1026,ak	We describe three techniques for making <term> syntactic analysis </term> more robust --- an <term> agenda-based scheduling parser </term> , a <term> recovery technique </term> for failed <term> parses </term> , and a new technique called <term> terminal substring parsing </term> .	#22455 We describe three techniques for making syntactic analysis more robust---an agenda-based scheduling parser, a recovery technique for failed parses, and a new technique calledterminal substring parsing.
tech,1-4-A92-1026,ak	For <term> pragmatics processing </term> , we describe how the method of <term> abductive inference </term> is inherently robust , in that an <term> interpretation </term> is always possible , so that in the absence of the required <term> world knowledge </term> , performance degrades gracefully .	#22460 Forpragmatics processing, we describe how the method of abductive inference is inherently robust, in that an interpretation is always possible, so that in the absence of the required world knowledge, performance degrades gracefully.
tech,10-4-A92-1026,ak	For <term> pragmatics processing </term> , we describe how the method of <term> abductive inference </term> is inherently robust , in that an <term> interpretation </term> is always possible , so that in the absence of the required <term> world knowledge </term> , performance degrades gracefully .	#22469 For pragmatics processing, we describe how the method ofabductive inference is inherently robust, in that an interpretation is always possible, so that in the absence of the required world knowledge, performance degrades gracefully.
other,19-4-A92-1026,ak	For <term> pragmatics processing </term> , we describe how the method of <term> abductive inference </term> is inherently robust , in that an <term> interpretation </term> is always possible , so that in the absence of the required <term> world knowledge </term> , performance degrades gracefully .	#22478 For pragmatics processing, we describe how the method of abductive inference is inherently robust, in that aninterpretation is always possible, so that in the absence of the required world knowledge, performance degrades gracefully.
other,32-4-A92-1026,ak	For <term> pragmatics processing </term> , we describe how the method of <term> abductive inference </term> is inherently robust , in that an <term> interpretation </term> is always possible , so that in the absence of the required <term> world knowledge </term> , performance degrades gracefully .	#22491 For pragmatics processing, we describe how the method of abductive inference is inherently robust, in that an interpretation is always possible, so that in the absence of the requiredworld knowledge, performance degrades gracefully.


	in Help