@inproceedings{yang-schneider-2024-relative,
title = "The Relative Clauses {AMR} Parsers Hate Most",
author = "Yang, Xiulin and
Schneider, Nathan",
editor = "Bonial, Claire and
Bonn, Julia and
Hwang, Jena D.",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Designing Meaning Representations @ LREC-COLING 2024",
month = may,
year = "2024",
address = "Torino, Italia",
publisher = "ELRA and ICCL",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2024.dmr-1.16",
pages = "151--161",
abstract = "This paper evaluates how well English Abstract Meaning Representation parsers process an important and frequent kind of Long-Distance Dependency construction, namely, relative clauses (RCs). On two syntactically parsed datasets, we evaluate five AMR parsers at recovering the semantic reentrancies triggered by different syntactic subtypes of relative clauses. Our findings reveal a general difficulty among parsers at predicting such reentrancies, with recall below 64{\%} on the EWT corpus. The sequence-to-sequence models (regardless of whether structural biases were included in training) outperform the compositional model. An analysis by relative clause subtype shows that passive subject RCs are the easiest, and oblique and reduced RCs the most challenging, for AMR parsers.",
}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="yang-schneider-2024-relative">
<titleInfo>
<title>The Relative Clauses AMR Parsers Hate Most</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Xiulin</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Yang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Nathan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Schneider</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2024-05</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Designing Meaning Representations @ LREC-COLING 2024</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Claire</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Bonial</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Julia</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Bonn</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jena</namePart>
<namePart type="given">D</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Hwang</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>ELRA and ICCL</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Torino, Italia</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>This paper evaluates how well English Abstract Meaning Representation parsers process an important and frequent kind of Long-Distance Dependency construction, namely, relative clauses (RCs). On two syntactically parsed datasets, we evaluate five AMR parsers at recovering the semantic reentrancies triggered by different syntactic subtypes of relative clauses. Our findings reveal a general difficulty among parsers at predicting such reentrancies, with recall below 64% on the EWT corpus. The sequence-to-sequence models (regardless of whether structural biases were included in training) outperform the compositional model. An analysis by relative clause subtype shows that passive subject RCs are the easiest, and oblique and reduced RCs the most challenging, for AMR parsers.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">yang-schneider-2024-relative</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2024.dmr-1.16</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2024-05</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>151</start>
<end>161</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T The Relative Clauses AMR Parsers Hate Most
%A Yang, Xiulin
%A Schneider, Nathan
%Y Bonial, Claire
%Y Bonn, Julia
%Y Hwang, Jena D.
%S Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Designing Meaning Representations @ LREC-COLING 2024
%D 2024
%8 May
%I ELRA and ICCL
%C Torino, Italia
%F yang-schneider-2024-relative
%X This paper evaluates how well English Abstract Meaning Representation parsers process an important and frequent kind of Long-Distance Dependency construction, namely, relative clauses (RCs). On two syntactically parsed datasets, we evaluate five AMR parsers at recovering the semantic reentrancies triggered by different syntactic subtypes of relative clauses. Our findings reveal a general difficulty among parsers at predicting such reentrancies, with recall below 64% on the EWT corpus. The sequence-to-sequence models (regardless of whether structural biases were included in training) outperform the compositional model. An analysis by relative clause subtype shows that passive subject RCs are the easiest, and oblique and reduced RCs the most challenging, for AMR parsers.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2024.dmr-1.16
%P 151-161
Markdown (Informal)
[The Relative Clauses AMR Parsers Hate Most](https://aclanthology.org/2024.dmr-1.16) (Yang & Schneider, DMR-WS 2024)
ACL
- Xiulin Yang and Nathan Schneider. 2024. The Relative Clauses AMR Parsers Hate Most. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Designing Meaning Representations @ LREC-COLING 2024, pages 151–161, Torino, Italia. ELRA and ICCL.