{ "paper_id": "P99-1017", "header": { "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", "date_generated": "2023-01-19T09:31:37.566811Z" }, "title": "Using aggregation for selecting content when generating referring expressions", "authors": [ { "first": "John", "middle": [ "A" ], "last": "Bateman", "suffix": "", "affiliation": { "laboratory": "", "institution": "University of Bremen", "location": { "settlement": "Bremen", "country": "Germany" } }, "email": "" }, { "first": "Sprach-Und", "middle": [], "last": "Literaturwissenschaften", "suffix": "", "affiliation": { "laboratory": "", "institution": "University of Bremen", "location": { "settlement": "Bremen", "country": "Germany" } }, "email": "" } ], "year": "", "venue": null, "identifiers": {}, "abstract": "Previous algorithms for the generation of referring expressions have been developed specifically for this purpose. Here we introduce an alternative approach based on a fully generic aggregation method also motivated for other generation tasks. We argue that the alternative contributes to a more integrated and uniform approach to content determination in the context of complete noun phrase generation.", "pdf_parse": { "paper_id": "P99-1017", "_pdf_hash": "", "abstract": [ { "text": "Previous algorithms for the generation of referring expressions have been developed specifically for this purpose. Here we introduce an alternative approach based on a fully generic aggregation method also motivated for other generation tasks. We argue that the alternative contributes to a more integrated and uniform approach to content determination in the context of complete noun phrase generation.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Abstract", "sec_num": null } ], "body_text": [ { "text": "When generating referring expressions (RE), it is generally considered necessary to provide sufficient information so that the reader/hearer is able to identify the intended referent. A number of broadly related referring expression algorithms have been developed over the past decade based on the natural metaphor of 'ruling out distractors' (Reiter, 1990; Dale and Haddock, 1991; Dale, 1992; Dale and Reiter, 1995; Horacek, 1995) . These special purpose algorithms constitute the 'standard' approach to determining content for RE-generation at this time; they have been developed solely for this purpose and have evolved to meet some specialized problems. In particular, it was found early on that the most ambitious RE goal-that of always providing the maximally concise referring expression necessary for the context ('full brevity')--is NP-haxd; subsequent work on RE-generation has therefore attempted to steer a course between computational tractability and coverage. One common feature of the favored algorithmic simplifications is their incrementality: potential descriptions are successively refined (usually non-destructively) to produce the final RE, which therefore may or may not be minimal. This is also often motivated on grounds of psychological plausibility.", "cite_spans": [ { "start": 343, "end": 357, "text": "(Reiter, 1990;", "ref_id": "BIBREF10" }, { "start": 358, "end": 381, "text": "Dale and Haddock, 1991;", "ref_id": "BIBREF1" }, { "start": 382, "end": 393, "text": "Dale, 1992;", "ref_id": "BIBREF4" }, { "start": 394, "end": 416, "text": "Dale and Reiter, 1995;", "ref_id": "BIBREF2" }, { "start": 417, "end": 431, "text": "Horacek, 1995)", "ref_id": "BIBREF6" } ], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": "1" }, { "text": "In this paper, we introduce a completely different metaphor for determining RE-content that may be considered in contrast to, or in combination with, previous approaches. The main difference lies in an orientation to the organization of a data set as a whole rather than to individual components as revealed during incremental search. Certain opportunities for concise expression that may otherwise be missed are then effectively isolated. The approach applies results from the previously unrelated generation task of 'aggregation', which is concerned with the grouping together of structurally related information.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": "1" }, { "text": "Aggregation in generation has hitherto generally consisted of lists of more or less ad hoc, or case-specific rules that group together paxticulax pre-specified configurations (cf. Dalianis and Hovy (1996) and Shaw (1998) ); however Bateman et al. (1998) provide a more rigorous and generic foundation for aggregation by applying results from data-summarization originally developed for multimedia information presentation (Kamps, 1997) . Bateman et al. set out a general purpose method for constructing aggregation lattices which succinctly represent all possible structural aggregations for any given data set. 1 The application of the aggregationbased metaphor to RE-content determination is motivated by the observation that if something is a 'potential distractor' for some intended referent, then it is equally, under appropriate conditions, a candidate for aggregation together with the intended referent. That 1'Structural' aggregation refers to opportunities for grouping inherent in the structure of the data and ignoring additional opportunities for grouping that might be found by modifying the data inferentially.", "cite_spans": [ { "start": 180, "end": 204, "text": "Dalianis and Hovy (1996)", "ref_id": "BIBREF5" }, { "start": 209, "end": 220, "text": "Shaw (1998)", "ref_id": "BIBREF11" }, { "start": 232, "end": 253, "text": "Bateman et al. (1998)", "ref_id": "BIBREF0" }, { "start": 422, "end": 435, "text": "(Kamps, 1997)", "ref_id": "BIBREF8" }, { "start": 438, "end": 452, "text": "Bateman et al.", "ref_id": null } ], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "The aggregation-based metaphor", "sec_num": "2" }, { "text": "is, what makes something a distractor is precisely the same as that which makes it a potential co-member of some single grouping created by structural aggregation. To see this, consider the following simple example discussed by Dale and Reiter (1995) consisting of three objects with various properties (re-represented here in a simple association list format): 2 (ol (type dog) (size small) (color (02 (type dog) (size large) (color (03 (type cat) (size small) (color To successfully refer to the first object ol, sufficient information must be given so as to 'rule out' the possible distractors: therefore, type alone is not sufficient, since this fails to rule out o2, nor is any combination of size or color sufficient, since these fail to rule out 03. Successful RE's are 'the small dog' or 'the black dog' and not 'the small one', 'the dog', or 'the black one'.", "cite_spans": [ { "start": 228, "end": 250, "text": "Dale and Reiter (1995)", "ref_id": "BIBREF2" } ], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "The aggregation-based metaphor", "sec_num": "2" }, { "text": "Considering the data set from the aggregation perspective, we ask instead how to refer most succinctly to all of the objects ol, o2, o3. There are two basic alternatives, indicated by bracketing in the following: 3 1. (A (small black and a large white) dog) and", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "The aggregation-based metaphor", "sec_num": "2" }, { "text": "(a small black cat).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "The aggregation-based metaphor", "sec_num": "2" }, { "text": "2. (A small black (dog and cat)) and (a large white dog).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "The aggregation-based metaphor", "sec_num": "2" }, { "text": "The former groups together ol and o2 on the basis of their shared type, while the latter groups together ol and o3 on the basis of their shared size and color properties. Significantly, these are just the possible sources of distraction that Dale and Reiter discuss. The set of possible aggregations can be determined from an aggregation lattice corresponding to the data set. We construct the lattice using methods developed in Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) (Wille, 1982) . For the example at hand, the aggregation lattice is built up as follows. The set of objects is considered as a relation table where the columns represent the object attributes and their values, and the rows 2This style of presentation is not particularly perspicuous but space precludes providing intelligible graphics, especially for the more complex situations used as examples below. In case of difficulties, we recommend quickly sketching the portrayed situation as a memory aid.", "cite_spans": [ { "start": 459, "end": 472, "text": "(Wille, 1982)", "ref_id": "BIBREF13" } ], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "The aggregation-based metaphor", "sec_num": "2" }, { "text": "3The exact rendering of these variants in English or any other language is not at issue here. black)) white)) black)) represent the individual objects. Since the attributes (e.g., 'color', 'size', etc.) can take multiple values (e.g., 'large', 'small'), this representation of the data is called a multivalued context. This is then converted into a one-valued context by comparing all rows of the table pairwise and, for each attribute (i.e., each column in the table) entering one distinguished value (e.g., T or 1) if the corresponding values of the attributes compared are identical, and another distinguished value (nil or 0) if they are not. The one-valued context for the objects ol-o3 is thus:", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "The aggregation-based metaphor", "sec_num": "2" }, { "text": "object pairs type size color ol-o2 1 0 0 ol-o3 0 1 1 o2-o3 0 0 0", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "The aggregation-based metaphor", "sec_num": "2" }, { "text": "This indicates that objects ol and o2 have equal values for their type attribute but otherwise not, while ol and 03 have equal values for both their size and color attributes but not for their type attributes. The one-valued context readily supports the derivation of formal concepts. A formal concept is defined in FCA as an extension-intension pair (A,B), where the extension is a subset A of the set of objects and the intension is a subset B of the set of attributes. For any given concept, each element of the extension must accept all attributes of the intension. Visually, this corresponds to permuting any rows and columns of the one-valued context and noting all the maximally 'filled' (i.e., containing l's or T's) rectangles. A 'subconcept' relation, ' {COLOR, SIZE} m(ol )=m(o3) Simple aggregation lattice", "uris": null, "type_str": "figure", "num": null }, "FIGREF1": { "text": "Aggregation lattice for modified example situation from Horacek", "uris": null, "type_str": "figure", "num": null } } } }