skip to main content
research-article

Improving Semantic Parsing with Enriched Synchronous Context-Free Grammars in Statistical Machine Translation

Published:03 November 2016Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Semantic parsing maps a sentence in natural language into a structured meaning representation. Previous studies show that semantic parsing with synchronous context-free grammars (SCFGs) achieves favorable performance over most other alternatives. Motivated by the observation that the performance of semantic parsing with SCFGs is closely tied to the translation rules, this article explores to extend translation rules with high quality and increased coverage in three ways. First, we examine the difference between word alignments for semantic parsing and statistical machine translation (SMT) to better adapt word alignment in SMT to semantic parsing. Second, we introduce both structure and syntax informed nonterminals, better guiding the parsing in favor of well-formed structure, instead of using a uninformed nonterminal in SCFGs. Third, we address the unknown word translation issue via synthetic translation rules. Last but not least, we use a filtering approach to improve performance via predicting answer type. Evaluation on the standard GeoQuery benchmark dataset shows that our approach greatly outperforms the state of the art across various languages, including English, Chinese, Thai, German, and Greek.

References

  1. Jacob Andreas, Andreas Vlachos, and Stephen Clark. 2013. Semantic parsing as machine translation. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics. 47--52.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Yoav Artzi and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2013. Weakly supervised learning of semantic parsers for mapping instructions to actions. Transactions of the Association of Computational Linguistics 1, 49--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Laura Banarescu, Claire Bonial, Shu Cai, Madalina Georgescu, Kira Griffitt, Ulf Hermjakob, Kevin Knight, Philipp Koehn, Martha Palmer, and Nathan Schneider. 2013. Abstract meaning representation for sembanking. In Proceedings of the 7th Linguistic Annotation Workshop and Interoperability with Discourse. 178--186.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jonathan Berant, Andrew Chou, Roy Frostig, and Percy Liang. 2013. Semantic parsing on freebase from question-answer pairs. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 1533--1544.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Jonathan Berant and Percy Liang. 2014. Semantic parsing via paraphrasing. In Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 1415--1425.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Peter E. Brown, Stephen A. Della Pietra, Vincent J. Della Pietra, and Robert L. Mercer. 1993. The mathematics of statistical machine translation: Parameter estimation. Computational Linguistics 19, 2, 263--313. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Qingqing Cai and Alexander Yates. 2013. Large-scale semantic parsing via schema matching and lexicon extension. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 423--433.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. David Chiang. 2007. Hierarchical phrase-based translation. Computational Linguistics 33, 2, 201--228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. David Chiang, Yuval Marton, and Philip Resnik. 2008. Online large-margin training of syntactic and structural translation features. In Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 224--233. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. James Clarke, Dan Goldwasser, Ming-Wei Chang, and Dan Roth. 2010. Driving semantic parsing from the worlds response. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning. 18--27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Chris Dyer, Adam Lopez, Juri Ganitkevitch, Jonathan Weese, Ferhan Ture, Phil Blunsom, Hendra Setiawan, Vladimir Eidelman, and Philip Resnik. 2010. cdec: A decoder, alignment, and learning framework for finite-state and context-free translation models. In Proceedings of the ACL 2010 System Demonstrations. 7--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Marcello Federico, Nicola Bertoldi, and Mauro Cettolo. 2008. IRSTLM: An open source toolkit for handling large scale language models. In Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (Interspeech’08). 1618--1621.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Michel Galley, Mark Hopkins, Kevin Knight, and Daniel Marcu. 2004. What’s in a translation rule? In Proceedings of the Natural Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT-NAACL’04). 273--280.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Ruifang Ge and Raymond Mooney. 2005. A statistical semantic parser that integrates syntax and semantics. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL’05). 9--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Dan Goldwasser, Roi Reichart, James Clarke, and Dan Roth. 2011. Confidence driven unsupervised semantic parsing. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 1486--1495. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Zhanming Jie and Wei Lu. 2014. Multilingual semantic parsing: Parsing multiple languages into semantic representations. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers (COLING’14). 1291--1301.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Thorsten Joachims. 1999. Making large-scale SVM learning practical. In Advances in Kernel Methods: Support Vector Learning, B. Schölkopf, C. Burges, and A. Smola (Eds.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 169--184. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Bevan Jones, Mark Johnson, and Sharon Goldwater. 2012. Semantic parsing with Bayesian tree transducers. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 488--496. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Rohit J. Kate and Raymond J. Mooney. 2006. Using string-kernels for learning semantic parsers. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 913--920. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Philipp Koehn, Hieu Hoang, Alexandra Birch, Chris Callison-Burch, Marcello Federico, Nicola Bertoldi, Brooke Cowan, et al. 2007. Moses: Open source toolkit for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Interactive Poster and Demonstration Sessions (ACL’07). 177--180. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Tom Kwiatkowski, Eunsol Choi, Yoav Artzi, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2013. Scaling semantic parsers with on-the-fly ontology matching. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 1545--1556.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Tom Kwiatkowski, Luke Zettlemoyer, Sharon Goldwater, and Mark Steedman. 2010. Inducing probabilistic CCG grammars from logical form with higher-order unification. In Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 1223--1233. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Tom Kwiatkowski, Luke Zettlemoyer, Sharon Goldwater, and Mark Steedman. 2011. Lexical generalization in CCG grammar induction for semantic parsing. In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 1512--1523. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Junhui Li, Zhaopeng Tu, Guodong Zhou, and Josef van Genabith. 2012. Using syntactic head information in hierarchical phrase-based translation. In Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation. 232--242. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Junhui Li, Muhua Zhu, Wei Lu, and Guodong Zhou. 2015. Improving semantic parsing with enriched synchronous context-free grammar. In Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 1455--1465.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Peng Li, Yang Liu, and Maosong Sun. 2013. An extended GHKM algorithm for inducing lambda-SCFG. In Proceedings of the 27th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. 605--611. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Percy Liang, Michael I. Jordan, and Dan Klein. 2011. Learning dependency-based compositional semantics. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. 590--599. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Yang Liu, Qun Liu, and Shouxun Lin. 2006. Tree-to-string alignment template for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 609--616. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Wei Lu. 2014. Semantic parsing with relaxed hybrid trees. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP’14). 1308--1318.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Wei Lu. 2015. Constrained semantic forests for improved discriminative semantic parsing. In Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 2: Short Papers). 737--742.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Wei Lu, Hwee Tou Ng, Wee Sun Lee, and Luke S. Zettlemoyer. 2008. A generative model for parsing natural language to meaning representations. In Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 783--792. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Klaus Macherey, Franz Josef Och, and Hermann Ney. 2001. Natural language understanding using statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology (EuroSpeech’01). 2205--2208.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Franz Josef Och and Hermann Ney. 2003. A systematic comparison of various statistical alignment models. Computational Linguistics 29, 1, 19--51. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu. 2002. BLEU: A method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 311--318. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Kishore A. Papineni, Salim Roukos, and Todd Ward. 1997. Feature-based language understanding. In Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology (EuroSpeech 1997). 1435--1438.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Hoifung Poon and Pedro Domingos. 2009. Unsupervised semantic parsing. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP’09). 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Matthew Richardson and Pedro Domingos. 2006. Markov logic networks. Machine Learning 62, 1--2, 107--136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Libin Shen, Jinxi Xu, and Ralph Weischedel. 2008. A new string-to-dependency machine translation algorithm with a target dependency language model. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (ACL’08). 577--585.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Mark Steedman. 2000. The Syntactic Process. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Zhaopeng Tu, Yang Liu, Yifan He, Josef van Genabith, Qun Liu, and Shouxun Lin. 2012. Combining multiple alignments to improve machine translation. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Posters (COLING’12). 1249--1260.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. David Vilar, Jia Xu, Luis Fernando D’Haro, and Hermann Ney. 2006. Error analysis of statistical machine translation output. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. 697--702.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Adrienne Wang, Tom Kwiatkowski, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2014. Morpho-syntactic lexical generalization for CCG semantic parsing. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 1284--1295.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Yuk Wah Wong and Raymond Mooney. 2006. Learning for semantic parsing with statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the NAACL. 439--446. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Yuk Wah Wong and Raymond Mooney. 2007. Learning synchronous grammars for semantic parsing with lambda calculus. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics. 960--967.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Tong Xiao, Jingbo Zhu, Hao Zhang, and Qiang Li. 2012. NiuTrans: An open source toolkit for phrase-based and syntax-based machine translation. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics 2012 System Demonstrations (ACL’12). 19--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Kenji Yamada and Kevin Knight. 2001. A syntax-based statistical translation model. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 523--530. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Luke S. Zettlemoyer and Michael Collins. 2005. Learning to map sentences to logical form: Structured classification with probabilistic categorial grammars. In Proceedings of the Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI’05). 658--666.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Andreas Zollmann and Ashish Venugopal. 2006. Syntax augmented machine translation via chart parsing. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation. 138--141. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Improving Semantic Parsing with Enriched Synchronous Context-Free Grammars in Statistical Machine Translation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!