 | | #7 Argument Selection and Coercion
Description
Task Description
This task involves identifying the compositional operations involved in
argument selection. Most annotation schemes to date encoding propositional
or predicative content have focused on the identification of the predicate
type, the argument extent, and the semantic role (or label) assigned to
that argument by the predicate. In contrast, this task attempts to capture
the "compositional history" of the argument selection relative to the
predicate. In particular, this task attempts to identify the operations of
type adjustment induced by a predicate over its arguments when they do not
match its selectional properties. The task is defined as follows: for each
argument of a predicate, identify whether the entity in that argument
position satisfies the type expected by the predicate. If not, then one
needs to identify how the entity in that position satisfies the typing
expected by the predicate; that is, to identify the source and target
types in a type-shifting (or coercion) operation.
The possible relations between the predicate and a given argument will,
for this task, be restricted to selection and coercion. In selection, the
argument NP satisfies the typing requirements of the predicate. For
example, in the sentence "The child threw the ball", the object NP "the
ball" directly satisfies the type expected by the predicate, Physical
Object. If this is not the case, then a coercion has occurred. For
example, in the sentence "The White House denied this statement.", the
type expected in subject position by the predicate is Human, but the
surface NP is typed as Location. The task is to identify both the type
mismatch and the type shift; namely Location -> Human.
Resources and Corpus Development
The following methodology will be followed in corpus creation: (1) A set
of selection contexts will be chosen; (2) A set of sentences will be
randomly selected for each chosen context; (3) The target noun phrase will
be identified in each sentence, and a composition type determined in each
case; (4) In cases of coercion, the source and target types for the
semantic head of each relevant noun phrase will be identified. We will
perform double annotation and adjudication over the corpus.
Evaluation Methodology
Precision and recall will be used as evaluation metrics. A scoring program
will be supplied for participants. Two subtasks will be evaluated
separately: (1) identifying the argument type and (2) identifying the
compositional operation (i.e. selection vs. coercion).
References
J. Pustejovsky, A. Rumshisky, J. L. Moszkowicz, and O. Batiukova. 2009. Glml: Annotating argument
selection and coercion. IWCS-8.
Organizers: James Pustejovsky, Nicoletta Calzolari, Anna Rumshisky, Jessica Moszkowicz,
Elisabetta Jezek, Valeria Quochi, Olga Batiukova
Web Site: http://asc-task.org/
Timeline:
- 11/10/09 - Trial data for English and Italian posted
- 3/10/10 - Training data for English and Italian released
- 3/27/10 - Test data for English and Italian released
- 4/02/10 - Closing competition
|
|