Moderators: LarsHellan and HansUszkoreit

Scribe: UlrichSchaefer

Thu, 23 Aug 1135-1300

• Intro by LH:
  • online presentation of grammars to outside world and among grammar writers
  • selected demo sentences showing coverage of grammar, specific phenomena
  • display "small" feature structures with interesting part of parse result, e.g. details interesting to MT/IE
  • morphology, syntax, semantics
• Discussion on motivation:
  • Oe: market to community, have more semantics, but show less?
  • BC: online demos important for internal, development purposes (show co-developers changes, progress on specific phenomena)
  • VK: online demos are also important for teaching
  • DF: show simplified, flattened result, tools exist, partly grammar-specific
• Discussion on filtering and displaying specific parts of parse result differently

  • BC: parse selection not shown in LKB interface

  • AC/DF/Oe: showing treebanked parse selection is possible

  • US/BC: ERG+GG online demo only displays tree + MRS

  • AC: XSLT is not for linguists, computer scientist necessary in addition

  • SD/RB: useful generic tree transformation language

  • Oe, LH: LKB avm button greyed out, configurable filtering important, but is end-user or grammar-writer specific

  • AC: display sub-FS under paths

  • AC/LH/Oe: not only hiding/showing sub-FSes, but also displaying differently

  • Oe: XSLT stylesheets to display in browser (HTML)

  • AC: TFS DTD, ISO could be implemented in LKB

  • US: applet in Heart of Gold, TFS DTD in documentation

  • Oe: what tools do exist?

    • LKB (X11)

    • MoriV

    • ERG online demo

    • SProUTput applet

    • ... ?

• HU: Common applications
  • groups that are interested in / working on information management, information extraction, event and relation extraction: Tokyo, Cambridge, Saarbrücken, Oslo, Melbourne
• AC: paraphrase task (as proposed in the session before): interesting task with nice properties:
  • take existing machinery to showcase (using parser + generator + some simple idioms)
  • types of phenomena in paraphrasing (example): light verbs
  • demo system: type in sentences, let system paraphrase, let people judge whether OK or not to get training data
  • set as common task?
  • information extraction in chemistry/medical domain is too special as common task
• HU: currently event/relation detection corpus-based
  • if with deep processing: make sure that it works with paraphrasing
  • paraphrasing as support for MT
• AC: learning paraphrase is learning semantic equivalences
  • also in grammar, style checking
  • JC: text to text paraphrasing, summarization, compression as generic applications, maybe too generic?
  • AC: rewrite rules; learn or hand-write
  • HU: semantic entailment is also related
• HU, AC: DELPH-IN as forum for seeing which groups are interested
  • learn about preferences of the groups (e.g. dialogue)
  • interest in dialogue, question answering: Lisbon, Saarbrücken, Trondheim
  • Oe: research interest (also) depends on funding opportunities
• Discussion on funding for DELPH-IN members
  • Oe: getting funding depends on whether application-oriented or scientific vision
  • HU: DELPH-IN as a whole did not and (because of missing formal frame) can not get funding (compared to ACE, CLEF), but groups individually got funding with the help of DELPH-IN in background, e.g. Lisbon (national, twice), Saarbrücken (PIRE)
  • gain reputation and credibility
  • bilateral grants (e.g. NSF, BMBF, ...) possible for DELPH-IN partners
  • AC: what could DELPH-IN do specifically to help people get funding?

• HU: various ways of dissemination to increase DELPH-IN visibility

  • common evaluation tasks
  • connection with both large companies and SMEs
  • visibility at international conferences (thank DELPH-IN in papers)

• Discussion on DELPH-IN web page

  • mention DELPH-IN on homepage of members
  • automatically gather DELPH-IN-related bibliography data from member web pages?
  • official maintainer of DELPH-IN web page?
  • Oe: facelift, content management system?, distributed responsibility?
  • Google visibility: PARGRAM vs. DELPH-IN
  • web page: color scheme, content, news, publications
  • cf. Fefor 2006 discussion ...