Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorBender, Emily M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSchneider, Meganen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-02-24T18:21:36Z
dc.date.available2014-02-24T18:21:36Z
dc.date.issued2014-02-24
dc.date.submitted2013en_US
dc.identifier.otherSchneider_washington_0250O_12424.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1773/24984
dc.descriptionThesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2013en_US
dc.description.abstractI examined the differences between the DeepBank and Penn Treebank and the effect of hand-created and grammar-derived annotations on dependency representations. The dependencies comparison involved transforming the DeepBank trees into Penn Treebank format, training the Stanford parser on the resulting output, and testing the trained parser vs known dependencies data; this task yielded a null result. A detailed analysis of the remaining differences between the Penn Treebank and modified DeepBank was done after the transformation process, showing many differences including parse selection, clause and phrase attachment, labeling of modifiers, and the treatment of proper noun phrases like movie titles. This yielded useful information for future work in this area.en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.rightsCopyright is held by the individual authors.en_US
dc.subjectdeepbank; dependencies; penn treebanken_US
dc.subject.otherLinguisticsen_US
dc.subject.otherlinguisticsen_US
dc.titleComparative Analysis of DeepBank and the Penn Treebanken_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.embargo.termsNo embargoen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record