Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)
-
Upload
desirae-rodriquez -
Category
Documents
-
view
40 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)
![Page 1: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)
The Incremental Algorithm (IA)
Dale & Reiter (1995)
![Page 2: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
The task: GRE
NLG can have different kinds of inputs: ‘Flat’ data (collections of atoms, e.g., in the
tables of a database) Logically complex data
In both cases, unfamiliar constants may be used, and this is sometimes unavoidable
![Page 3: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
No familiar constant available:
1. The referent has a familiar name, but it’s not unique, e.g., ‘John Smith’
2. The referent has no familiar name: trains, furniture, trees, atomic particles, …
( In such cases, databases use database keys,
e.g., ‘Smith$73527$’, ‘TRAIN-3821’ )
3. Similar: sets of objects.
![Page 4: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Natural Languages are too economic to have a proper name for everything
Names may not even be most appropriate So, speakers/NLG systems have to invent
ways of referring to things. E.g., ‘the 7:38 Trenton express’
![Page 5: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Older work on GRE
Winograd (1972) – the SHRDLU system,
and especially
Appelt (1985) – the KAMP system: trying to understand reference as part of speech acts: How can RE’s sometimes add information? Why can RE1 be more relevant than RE2?
Dale and Reiter isolate GRE as a separate task, and focus on simple cases
![Page 6: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Dale & Reiter: best description fulfils Gricean maxims.
(Quality:) list properties truthfully (Quantity:) list sufficient properties to allow hearer to
identify referent – but not more (Relevance:) use properties that are of interest in
themselves * (Manner:) be brief
* Slightly different from D&R 1995
![Page 7: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
D&R’s expectation:
Violation of a maxim leads to implicatures. For example,
[Quantity] ‘the pitbull’ (when there is only one dog).
There’s just one problem: …
![Page 8: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
…people don’t speak this way
For example, [Quantity] ‘the red chair’ (when there is
only one red object in the domain). [Quantity] ‘I broke my arm’
(when I have two).
General: empirical work shows much redundancy
Similar for other maxims, e.g., [Quality] ‘the man with the martini’ (Donellan)
![Page 9: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Consider the following formalization:
Full Brevity (FB): Never use more than the minimal number of properties required for identification (Dale 1989)
An algorithm:
![Page 10: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Dale 1989:
1. Check whether 1 property is enough
2. Check whether 2 properties is enough
….
Etc., until
success {minimal description is generated} or
failure {no description is possible}
![Page 11: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Problem: exponential complexity
Worst-case, this algorithm would have to inspect all combinations of properties. n properties combinations.
Some algorithms may be faster, but …
Theoretical result: any FB algorithm must be exponential in the number of properties.
n2
![Page 12: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
D&R conclude that Full Brevity cannot be achieved in practice.
They designed an algorithm that only approximates Full Brevity:
the Incremental Algorithm (IA).
![Page 13: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Psycholinguistic inspiration behind IA (e.g. Pechmann 89; overview in Levelt 89)
Speakers often include “unnecessary modifiers” in their referring expressions
Speakers often start describing a referent before they have seen all distractors (as shown by eye-tracking experiments)
Some Attributes (e.g. Colour) seem more likely to be noticed and used than others
Some Attributes (e.g., Type) contribute strongly to a Gestalt. Gestalts help readers identify referents. (“The red thing” vs. “the red bird”)
Let’s start with a simplified version of IA, which uses properties rather than <Attribute:Value> pairs.Type and head nouns are ignored, for now.
![Page 14: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Incremental Algorithm (informal):
Properties are considered in a fixed order:
P = A property is included if it is ‘useful’:
true of target; false of some distractors Stop when done; so earlier properties have
a greater chance of being included. (E.g., a perceptually salient property)
Therefore called preference order.
nPPPP ,...,,, 321
![Page 15: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
r = individual to be described P = list of properties, in preference order P is a property L= properties in generated description
(Recall: we’re not worried about realization today)
![Page 16: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
FailureReturn
LReturn then {r}C If
]][[C:C
}{L:L
do then ]][[ C &]][[r If
:do P allFor
Domain:C
Φ:L
P
P
PP
P
![Page 17: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
P = < desk (ab), chair (cde), Swedish (ac), Italian (bde), dark (ade), light (bc), grey (a), 100£ ({ac}), 150£(bd) , 250£ ({}), wooden ({}), metal (abcde), cotton ({d}) >
Domain = {a,b,c,d,e} . Now describe: a = <...>
d = <...>
e = <...>
![Page 18: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
P = < desk (ab), chair (cde), Swedish (ac), Italian (bde), dark (ade), light (bc), grey (a), 100£ (ac),150£ (bd),250£ ({}), wooden ({}), metal (abcde), cotton (d) >
Domain = {a,b,c,d,e} . Now describe: a = <desk {ab}, Swedish {ac}> d = <chair,Italian,150> (Nonminimal) e = <chair,Italian, ....> (Impossible)
![Page 19: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Incremental Algorithm
It’s a hillclimbing algorithm: ever better approximations of a successful description.
‘Incremental’ implies no backtracking.
Not always the minimal number of properties.
![Page 20: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Incremental Algorithm
Logical completeness: A unique description is found in finite time if there exists one Question: is IA logicaly complete?
Computational complexity: Assume thattesting for usefulness takes constant time.Then worst-case time complexity is O(np) where np is the number of properties in P.
![Page 21: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Better approximation of Full Brevity(D&R 1995)
Attribute + Value model: Properties grouped together as in original example:
Origin: Sweden, Italy, ...
Colour: dark, grey, ... Optimization within the set of properties
based on the same Attribute
![Page 22: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Incremental Algorithm, using Attributes and Values
r = individual to be described
A = list of Attributes, in preference order
Def: = Value j of Attribute i
L= properties in generated description
jiV ,
![Page 23: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
FailureReturn
LReturn then {r}C If
]][[VC:C
}{VL:L
do then ]]V[[ C &]]V[[r If
)A(r,estValueBFindV
:doA A allFor
Domain:C
Φ:L
ji,
ji,
ji,ji,
iji,
i
![Page 24: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
FindBestValue(r,A):
- Find Values of A that are true of r,
while removing some distractors
(If these don’t exist, go to next Attribute)
- Within this set, select the Value that
removes the largest number of distractors(NB: discriminatory power)
- If there’s a tie, select the most general one
- If there’s still a tie, select an arbitrary one
![Page 25: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Example: D = {a,b,c,d,f,g}
Type: furniture (abcd), desk (ab), chair (cd) Origin: Europe (bdfg), USA (ac), Italy (bd)
Describe a: {desk, American}
(furniture removes fewer distractors than desk)
Describe b: {desk, European}
(European is more general than Italian)
N.B. This disregards relevance, etc.
![Page 26: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
This is a better approximation of Full Brevity
But is it a better algorithm?
Question 1: Is it true that all values of an attribute are (roughly) equally preferred? If the colour of a car is pink, this is more
notable than if it’s white Question 2: Doesn’t the new algorithm
sometimes fail unnecessarily?
![Page 27: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
About question 2
Exercise: Construct an example where no description is found, although one exists.
Hint: Let Attribute have Values whose extensions overlap.
![Page 28: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Example: D = {a,b,c,d,e,f} Contains: wood (abe), plastic (acdf) Colour: grey (ab), yellow (cd)
Describe a: {wood, grey, ...} - Failure
(wood removes more distractors than plastic)
Compare:
Describe a: {plastic, grey} - Success
![Page 29: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Conlusion
The version of IA that uses <Attribute,Value> format allows the use of simple ontological information (e.g., Italian European)⊂
But grouping properties into Attributes makes it difficult to model the “unusualness” of a property
And the idea of using discriminatory power leads to logical incompleteness.
IA is therefore (?) often used in its simpler form, without the <Attribute,Value> format
![Page 30: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Complexity of the algorithm
nd = nr. of distractors
nl = nr. of properties in the description
nv = nr. of Values (for all Attributes)
According to D&R: O(nd nl )
(Typical running time)
Alternative assessment: O(nv)
(Worst-case running time)
![Page 31: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Minor complication: Head nouns
Another way in which human descriptions are nonminimal
A description needs a Noun, but not all properties are expressed as Nouns
Example: Suppose Colour was the
most-preferred Attribute, and suppose target = a
![Page 32: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Colours: dark (ade), light (bc), grey (a) Type: furniture (abcde), desk (ab), chair (cde) Origin: Sweden (ac), Italy (bde) Price: 100 (ac), 150 (bd) , 250 ({}) Contains: wood ({}), metal ({abcde}), cotton(d)
target = a Describe a: {grey} ‘The grey’ ? (Not in English)
![Page 33: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
D&R’s repair:
Assume that Values of the AttributeType can be expressed in a Noun.
After the core algorithm:
- check whether Type is represented.
- if not, then add the best Value of the Type Attribute to the description
![Page 34: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Versions of Dale and Reiter’s Incremental Algorithm (IA) have often been implemented
Still the starting point for many new algorithms.
But how human-like is the output of the IA really? The paper does not contain an evaluation of the algorithms discussed
![Page 35: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Comments on the algorithm
1. Redundancy exists, but not for principled reasons, e.g., for
- marking topic changes, etc. (Corpus work by Pam Jordan et. al.)
- making it easy to find the referent (Experimental work by Paraboni et al.)
![Page 36: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Limitations of the algorithm
2. Targets are individual objects, never sets. What changes when target = {a,b,c} ?
3. Incremental algorithm uses only conjunctions of atomic properties. No negations, disjunctions, etc.
![Page 37: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Limitations of D&R
4. No relations with other objects, e.g., ‘the orange on the table’.
5. Differences in salience are not taken into account.
• When we say “the dog”, does this mean that there is only one dog in the world?
6. Language realization is disregarded.
![Page 38: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Limitations of D&R
7. Calculation of complexity is iffy
• Role of “Typical” run time and length of description is unclear
• Greedy Algorithm (GA) dismissed even though it has polynomial complexity
• GA: always choose the property that removes the maximum number of distractors
![Page 39: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
More fundamental features
Speaker and Hearer have shared knowledge This knowledge can be formalised using
atomic statements Foundations were left unformalised, e.g.
Closed-World Assumption Unique Name Assumption
The aim of GRE is to identify the target referent uniquely. (I.e., the aim is to construct a “distinguishing description” of the referent.)
![Page 40: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Discussion: How bad is it for a GRE
algorithm to take exponential time choosing the best RE? How do human speakers cope? More complex types of referring expressions
problem becomes even harder Restrict to combinations whose length is
less than x problem not exponential. Example: descriptions containing at most n
properties (Full Brevity)
![Page 41: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Linguist’s view
We don’t pretend to mirror psychologically correct processes. (It’s enough if GRE output is correct).
So why worry if our algorithms are slow?
![Page 42: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Mathematicians’ view
structure of a problem becomes clear when no restrictions are put.
Practical addition:
What if the input does not conform with these restrictions? (GRE does not control its own input!)
![Page 43: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
A compromise view
Compare with Description Logic:- Increasingly complex algorithms …- that tackle larger and larger fragments of logic …- and whose complexity is ‘conservative’
When looking at more complex phenomena, take care not to slow down generation of simple cases too much
![Page 44: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
A note on the history of the IA
Appelt (1985) did not focus on distinguishing descriptions
did not describe an algorithm in detail suggested attempting properties one by one cited the Gricean maxims suggested that the shortest description may
not always be the best one
![Page 45: Generation of Referring Expressions (GRE)](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/56813452550346895d9b386b/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)