65 lines
2.5 KiB
Markdown
65 lines
2.5 KiB
Markdown
|
---
|
||
|
|
date: '2022-11-23T19:50:16'
|
||
|
|
hypothesis-meta:
|
||
|
|
created: '2022-11-23T19:50:16.484020+00:00'
|
||
|
|
document:
|
||
|
|
title:
|
||
|
|
- 2210.07188.pdf
|
||
|
|
flagged: false
|
||
|
|
group: __world__
|
||
|
|
hidden: false
|
||
|
|
id: DXdcFmtoEe2_uNemAZII7w
|
||
|
|
links:
|
||
|
|
html: https://hypothes.is/a/DXdcFmtoEe2_uNemAZII7w
|
||
|
|
incontext: https://hyp.is/DXdcFmtoEe2_uNemAZII7w/arxiv.org/pdf/2210.07188.pdf
|
||
|
|
json: https://hypothes.is/api/annotations/DXdcFmtoEe2_uNemAZII7w
|
||
|
|
permissions:
|
||
|
|
admin:
|
||
|
|
- acct:ravenscroftj@hypothes.is
|
||
|
|
delete:
|
||
|
|
- acct:ravenscroftj@hypothes.is
|
||
|
|
read:
|
||
|
|
- group:__world__
|
||
|
|
update:
|
||
|
|
- acct:ravenscroftj@hypothes.is
|
||
|
|
tags:
|
||
|
|
- coreference
|
||
|
|
- NLProc
|
||
|
|
- data-annotation
|
||
|
|
target:
|
||
|
|
- selector:
|
||
|
|
- end: 3539
|
||
|
|
start: 3191
|
||
|
|
type: TextPositionSelector
|
||
|
|
- exact: owever, these datasets vary widelyin their definitions of coreference
|
||
|
|
(expressed viaannotation guidelines), resulting in inconsistent an-notations
|
||
|
|
both within and across domains and lan-guages. For instance, as shown in Figure
|
||
|
|
1, whileARRAU (Uryupina et al., 2019) treats generic pro-nouns as non-referring,
|
||
|
|
OntoNotes chooses not tomark them at all
|
||
|
|
prefix: "larly for \u201Cwe\u201D.et al., 2016a). H"
|
||
|
|
suffix: .It is thus unclear which guidel
|
||
|
|
type: TextQuoteSelector
|
||
|
|
source: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2210.07188.pdf
|
||
|
|
text: One of the big issues is that different co-reference datasets have significant
|
||
|
|
differences in annotation guidelines even within the coreference family of tasks
|
||
|
|
- I found this quite shocking as one might expect coreference to be fairly well
|
||
|
|
defined as a task.
|
||
|
|
updated: '2022-11-23T19:54:31.023210+00:00'
|
||
|
|
uri: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2210.07188.pdf
|
||
|
|
user: acct:ravenscroftj@hypothes.is
|
||
|
|
user_info:
|
||
|
|
display_name: James Ravenscroft
|
||
|
|
in-reply-to: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2210.07188.pdf
|
||
|
|
tags:
|
||
|
|
- coreference
|
||
|
|
- NLProc
|
||
|
|
- data-annotation
|
||
|
|
- hypothesis
|
||
|
|
type: reply
|
||
|
|
url: /replies/2022/11/23/1669233016
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
<blockquote>owever, these datasets vary widelyin their definitions of coreference (expressed viaannotation guidelines), resulting in inconsistent an-notations both within and across domains and lan-guages. For instance, as shown in Figure 1, whileARRAU (Uryupina et al., 2019) treats generic pro-nouns as non-referring, OntoNotes chooses not tomark them at all</blockquote>One of the big issues is that different co-reference datasets have significant differences in annotation guidelines even within the coreference family of tasks - I found this quite shocking as one might expect coreference to be fairly well defined as a task.
|