Eckhard Bick - VISL

(4) Table: syntactic tree structure analysis - performance
Portuguese CG - PALAVRAS
(with full disambiguation)
4937 words, 6674 nodes
cases precision
recall
tag
alone
tag/
attach
-
ment
attachment
alone
- 444 -
tag
alone
tag/
attachment
attach-
ment
alone
English
FDG
preci re-
-sion call
tag/
attachment
@SUBJ 351 97.3 97.3 100 93.4 93.4 98.0 95 83
@ACC 368 95.7 95.4 99.7 97.2 97.0 98.6 94 88
@PIV 88 93.1 93.1 100 92.0 92.0 100
@ADV 19 84.2 84.2 100 84.2 84.2 100
@SC 113 92.2 92.2 100 94.7 94.7 99.1 92 96
@OC 17 100 100 100 82.4 82.4 88.2
@MV 596 99.3 99.3 100 99.7 99.7 100
@AUX 87 98.9 98.9 100 100.0 100.0 100
@AUX< 96 98.9 98.9 100 97.9 97.9 100
@ADVL 518 92.5 91.9 99.4 95.4 94.8 96.7
@PRED 48 87.0 84.8 97.7 83.3 81.3 87.5
@APP 20 84.2 84.2 94.7 80.0 80.0 90.0
@P< 911 99.3 99.3 100 98.9 98.9 99.0
@>A 45 92.7 92.7 100 84.4 84.4 84.4
@A< (PCP) 43 97.0 97.0 100 76.7 76.7 79.1
@A< (other) 26 100 100 100 88.5 88.5 88.5
@KOMP< 10 100 100 100 90.0 90.0 90.0
@>N 1029 98.9 98.9 100 99.5 99.5 100
@N< 749 98.6 97.1 98.5 95.7 94.3 94.5
@SUB 71 100 100 100 98.6 98.6 100
@COM 17 94.1 94.1 100 94.1 94.1 100
@NPHR 60 75.0 75.0 100 100 100 100
@AS< 25 95.7 95.7 100 88.0 88.0 100
unnamed 95.3 87.9
all of above 5307 97.1 96.8 99.5 96.9 96.6 97.9
In order to retain comparability with ordinary CG performance numbers, and because they have no
“upward” dependency links, @H (head of group) and the sentence top node @STA (statement) are
not used in the above table. Of 1988 @H-tags and 264 @STA-tags, only 2 were wrong, and
including them in the performance calculations would “improve” both recall and precision in a
meaningless way. Rather, only those function tags are measured that would have appeared in a pure
CG-analysis, too. The discrepancy between a word count of 4937 and a function node count of 5307