In this work, we explore the ability of artificial neural networks to judge the grammatical acceptability of a sentence. Machine learning research of this kind is well placed to answer important open questions about the role of prior linguistic bias in language acquisition by providing a test for the Poverty of the Stimulus Argument. In service of this goal, we introduce the Corpus of Linguistic Acceptability (CoLA), a set of 10,657 English sentences labeled as grammatical or ungrammatical by expert linguists. We train several recurrent neural networks to do binary acceptability classification. These models set a baseline for the task. Error-analysis testing the models on specific grammatical phenomena reveals that they learn some systematic grammatical generalizations like subject-verb-object word order without any grammatical supervision. We find that neural sequence models show promise on the acceptability classification task. However, human-like performance across a wide range of grammatical constructions remains far off.
It is possible to construct an acceptability corpus automatically if a method is found that can produce (roughly) unacceptable sentences. One approach is to programmatically generate sentences that are unlikely to be acceptable. distort real sentences by, for example, deleting words, inserting words, or altering verbal inflection. use round-trip machine-translation from English into various languages and back. A second family of approaches take sentences from essays written by non-native speakers @cite_19 . A third takes advantage of linguistics examples: and build datasets of 133 and 552 examples from syntax textbooks. CoLA scales up this line of work.
@cite_19
2806120502 1489181569 2122514299 2047603832
In this work, we explore the ability of artificial neural networks to judge the grammatical acceptability of a sentence. Machine learning research of this kind is well placed to answer important open questions about the role of prior linguistic bias in language acquisition by providing a test for the Poverty of the Stimulus Argument. In service of this goal, we introduce the Corpus of Linguistic Acceptability (CoLA), a set of 10,657 English sentences labeled as grammatical or ungrammatical by expert linguists. We train several recurrent neural networks to do binary acceptability classification. These models set a baseline for the task. Error-analysis testing the models on specific grammatical phenomena reveals that they learn some systematic grammatical generalizations like subject-verb-object word order without any grammatical supervision. We find that neural sequence models show promise on the acceptability classification task. However, human-like performance across a wide range of grammatical constructions remains far off. Researchers in both machine translation (e.g., 1990) and bilingual lexicography (e.g., Klavans and Tzoukermann 1990) have recently become interested in studying bilingual corpora, bodies of text such as the Canadian Hansards (parliamentary proceedings), which are available in multiple languages (such as French and English). One useful step is to align the sentences, that is, to identify correspondences between sentences in one language and sentences in the other language.This paper will describe a method and a program (align) for aligning sentences based on a simple statistical model of character lengths. The program uses the fact that longer sentences in one language tend to be translated into longer sentences in the other language, and that shorter sentences tend to be translated into shorter sentences. A probabilistic score is assigned to each proposed correspondence of sentences, based on the scaled difference of lengths of the two sentences (in characters) and the variance of this difference. This probabilistic score is used in a dynamic programming framework to find the maximum likelihood alignment of sentences.It is remarkable that such a simple approach works as well as it does. An evaluation was performed based on a trilingual corpus of economic reports issued by the Union Bank of Switzerland (UBS) in English, French, and German. The method correctly aligned all but 4 of the sentences. Moreover, it is possible to extract a large subcorpus that has a much smaller error rate. By selecting the best-scoring 80 of the alignments, the error rate is reduced from 4 to 0.7 . There were more errors on the English-French subcorpus than on the English-German subcorpus, showing that error rates will depend on the corpus considered; however, both were small enough to hope that the method will be useful for many language pairs.To further research on bilingual corpora, a much larger sample of Canadian Hansards (approximately 90 million words, half in English and and half in French) has been aligned with the align program and will be available through the Data Collection Initiative of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL DCI). In addition, in order to facilitate replication of the align program, an appendix is provided with detailed c-code of the more difficult core of the align program. Most previous work on trainable language generation has focused on two paradigms: (a) using a generation decisions of an existing generator. Both approaches rely on the existence of a handcrafted generation component, which is likely to limit their scalability to new domains. The first contribution of this article is to present Bagel, a fully data-driven generation method that treats the language generation task as a search for the most likely sequence of semantic concepts and realization phrases, according to Factored Language Models (FLMs). As domain utterances are not readily available for most natural language generation tasks, a large creative effort is required to produce the data necessary to represent human linguistic variation for nontrivial domains. This article is based on the assumption that learning to produce paraphrases can be facilitated by collecting data from a large sample of untrained annotators using crowdsourcing—rather than a few domain experts—by relying on a coarse meaning representation. A second contribution of this article is to use crowdsourced data to show how dialogue naturalness can be improved by learning to vary the output utterances generated for a given semantic input. Two data-driven methods for generating paraphrases in dialogue are presented: (a) by sampling from the n-best list of realizations produced by Bagel's FLM reranker; and (b) by learning a structured perceptron predicting whether candidate realizations are valid paraphrases. We train Bagel on a set of 1,956 utterances produced by 137 annotators, which covers 10 types of dialogue acts and 128 semantic concepts in a tourist information system for Cambridge. An automated evaluation shows that Bagel outperforms utterance class LM baselines on this domain. A human evaluation of 600 resynthesized dialogue extracts shows that Bagel's FLM output produces utterances comparable to a handcrafted baseline, whereas the perceptron classifier performs worse. Interestingly, human judges find the system sampling from the n-best list to be more natural than a system always returning the first-best utterance. The judges are also more willing to interact with the n-best system in the future. These results suggest that capturing the large variation found in human language using data-driven methods is beneficial for dialogue interaction. This paper presents a corpus-based algorithm capable of inducing inflectional morphological analyses of both regular and highly irregular forms (such as brought→bring) from distributional patterns in large monolingual text with no direct supervision. The algorithm combines four original alignment models based on relative corpus frequency, contextual similarity, weighted string similarity and incrementally retrained inflectional transduction probabilities. Starting with no paired examples for training and no prior seeding of legal morphological transformations, accuracy of the induced analyses of 3888 past-tense test cases in English exceeds 99.2 for the set, with currently over 80 accuracy on the most highly irregular forms and 99.7 accuracy on forms exhibiting non-concatenative suffixation.