2006 · 94 citations · 25 references
Language StudiesComputer ScienceLinguisticsComputational LinguisticsMachine LearningNatural Language ProcessingMorphological Ambiguity ResolutionMorphological AnalysisMorphological DisambiguationMorphological FeaturesMorphological ParsingPart-of-speech TaggingFeature-based Morphological AnalysisMachine Learning-based Morphological DisambiguationMorphological LearningMorphological Parsing ModelsParse TreesRule-based Morphological DisambiguationRule-based Morphological ParsingSupervised Morphological Disambiguation
Morphological ambiguity in Turkish, where roughly half of the words are ambiguous and suffixes can be unlimited, poses a significant challenge for natural language processing. The paper introduces a rule‑based model aimed at disambiguating Turkish morphology. The authors employ a decision‑list learning algorithm, training a separate model for each of 126 morphological features and combining votes with confidence scores to select the final parse. The resulting system achieves 96 % accuracy, surpassing prior statistical models, while a single decision list on full tags yields only 91 %.
In this paper, we present a rule based model for morphological disambiguation of Turkish. The rules are generated by a novel decision list learning algorithm using supervised training. Morphological ambiguity (e.g. lives = live+s or life+s) is a challenging problem for agglutinative languages like Turkish where close to half of the words in running text are morphologically ambiguous. Furthermore, it is possible for a word to take an unlimited number of suffixes, therefore the number of possible morphological tags is unlimited. We attempted to cope with these problems by training a separate model for each of the 126 morphological features recognized by the morphological analyzer. The resulting decision lists independently vote on each of the potential parses of a word and the final parse is selected based on our confidence on these votes. The accuracy of our model (96%) is slightly above the best previously reported results which use statistical models. For comparison, when we train a single decision list on full tags instead of using separate models on each feature we get 91% accuracy.
25
Peter Clark, Tim Niblett · Machine Learning · 1989 · 2K citations · Full text
A Maximum Entropy Model for Part-Of-Speech Tagging
Adwait Ratnaparkhi · 1996 · 1.3K citations
Peter Clark, Tim Niblett · Machine Learning · 1989 · 994 citations · Full text