Concordance

Query J05-1003 53 >
Negative filter NNS 46 >
Shuffle 46 (2,144.6 per million)

other,21-2-J05-1003,bq	probabilities </term> that define an initial <term>	ranking	</term> of these <term> parses </term> . A second	#8684 The base parser produces a set of candidate parses for each input sentence, with associated probabilities that define an initialranking of these parses.
measure(ment),14-8-J05-1003,bq	</term> , a 13 % relative decrease in <term>	F-measure	</term> error over the <term> baseline model	#8849 The new model achieved 89.75% F-measure, a 13% relative decrease inF-measure error over the baseline model’s score of 88.2%.
tech,40-4-J05-1003,bq	define a <term> derivation </term> or a <term>	generative model	</term> which takes these <term> features </term>	#8750 The strength of our approach is that it allows a tree to be represented as an arbitrary set of features, without concerns about how these features interact or overlap and without the need to define a derivation or agenerative model which takes these features into account.
other,16-5-J05-1003,bq	the <term> boosting approach </term> to <term>	ranking problems	</term> described in <term> Freund et al. (	#8775 We introduce a new method for the reranking task, based on the boosting approach toranking problems described in Freund et al. (1998).
other,25-7-J05-1003,bq	additional 500,000 <term> features </term> over <term>	parse trees	</term> that were not included in the original	#8824 The method combined the log-likelihood under a baseline model (that of Collins [1999]) with evidence from an additional 500,000 features overparse trees that were not included in the original model.
other,12-10-J05-1003,bq	<term> algorithm </term> over the obvious <term>	implementation	</term> of the <term> boosting approach </term>	#8899 Experiments show significant efficiency gains for the new algorithm over the obviousimplementation of the boosting approach.
tech,3-6-J05-1003,bq	al. ( 1998 ) </term> . We apply the <term>	boosting method	</term> to <term> parsing </term> the <term> Wall	#8789 We apply theboosting method to parsing the Wall Street Journal treebank.
tech,15-10-J05-1003,bq	obvious <term> implementation </term> of the <term>	boosting approach	</term> . We argue that the method is an	#8902 Experiments show significant efficiency gains for the new algorithm over the obvious implementation of theboosting approach.
tech,2-8-J05-1003,bq	original <term> model </term> . The new <term>	model	</term> achieved 89.75 % <term> F-measure </term>	#8837 The newmodel achieved 89.75% F-measure, a 13% relative decrease in F-measure error over the baseline model’s score of 88.2%.
tech,9-9-J05-1003,bq	a new <term> algorithm </term> for the <term>	boosting approach	</term> which takes advantage of the <term>	#8870 The article also introduces a new algorithm for theboosting approach which takes advantage of the sparsity of the feature space in the parsing data.
other,23-9-J05-1003,bq	of the feature space </term> in the <term>	parsing data	</term> . Experiments show significant efficiency	#8884 The article also introduces a new algorithm for the boosting approach which takes advantage of the sparsity of the feature space in theparsing data.
tech,8-12-J05-1003,bq	experiments in this article are on <term>	natural language parsing ( NLP )	</term> , the <term> approach </term> should	#8944 Although the experiments in this article are onnatural language parsing ( NLP ), the approach should be applicable to many other NLP problems which are naturally framed as ranking tasks, for example, speech recognition, machine translation, or natural language generation.
lr-prod,8-6-J05-1003,bq	method </term> to <term> parsing </term> the <term>	Wall Street Journal treebank	</term> . The <term> method </term> combined	#8794 We apply the boosting method to parsing theWall Street Journal treebank.
other,7-2-J05-1003,bq	<term> parser </term> produces a set of <term>	candidate parses	</term> for each input <term> sentence </term>	#8670 The base parser produces a set ofcandidate parses for each input sentence, with associated probabilities that define an initial ranking of these parses.
tech,11-1-J05-1003,bq	which rerank the output of an existing <term>	probabilistic parser	</term> . The base <term> parser </term> produces	#8660 This article considers approaches which rerank the output of an existingprobabilistic parser.
other,23-12-J05-1003,bq	should be applicable to many other <term>	NLP problems	</term> which are naturally framed as <term>	#8959 Although the experiments in this article are on natural language parsing (NLP), the approach should be applicable to many otherNLP problems which are naturally framed as ranking tasks, for example, speech recognition, machine translation, or natural language generation.
model,34-7-J05-1003,bq	were not included in the original <term>	model	</term> . The new <term> model </term> achieved	#8833 The method combined the log-likelihood under a baseline model (that of Collins [1999]) with evidence from an additional 500,000 features over parse trees that were not included in the originalmodel.
tech,6-6-J05-1003,bq	the <term> boosting method </term> to <term>	parsing	</term> the <term> Wall Street Journal treebank	#8792 We apply the boosting method toparsing the Wall Street Journal treebank.
other,16-9-J05-1003,bq	</term> which takes advantage of the <term>	sparsity of the feature space	</term> in the <term> parsing data </term> .	#8877 The article also introduces a new algorithm for the boosting approach which takes advantage of thesparsity of the feature space in the parsing data.
tech,16-12-J05-1003,bq	language parsing ( NLP ) </term> , the <term>	approach	</term> should be applicable to many other	#8952 Although the experiments in this article are on natural language parsing (NLP), theapproach should be applicable to many other NLP problems which are naturally framed as ranking tasks, for example, speech recognition, machine translation, or natural language generation.


	in Help