Hi,
your new defintion "Left wide, right wide" is fine for me. +1 (Symmetry is really important in my opinion, much more important than the actual specification of predicates for zero-length annotations.) Best, Peter Am 24.10.2020 um 23:05 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho: > Hi, > >> On 24. Oct 2020, at 15:12, Peter Klügl <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Yes, there needs to be some additional changes then. In my opinion, it's >> ok if ADJACENT doe not imply OVERLAPPING. Just by listening to it, it >> sounds also somwhat reasonable. Afterall, it's just a name for a >> predicate configuration. >> >> For zero-length annotations, OVERLAPPING would still apply due to the >> inner minimal span that is not ADJACENT. > Thinking more about it, I am starting to believe that we should not try > to approach the nature of zero-width spans by observing how a infinitely > small span would behave but rather be considering their nature of not > having any width at all. > > So what does that mean? > > COVERED-BY: we need to decide if a zero-width span at the start/end > of another span is covered by the other span or not. For a symmetric > approach, the same decision should be made irrespective of whether the > zero-width span is located at the start or end of the other span. > Let's say we want to query for all annotations on a sentence, > we'd almost certainly want to include any zero-width annotations at > the start and end of the sentence - so: let's say a zero-width > annotation is at the start/end of another annotation is ALWAYS COVERED BY > this other annotation. > > LEFT/RIGHT ADJACENT: in order for a span X to be adjacent to a span Y, > X should start/end at the same location as Y. However, it seems quite > contradictory that a span can be simultaneously COVERED-BY and ADJACENT. > So as a consequence of the choice on COVERED-BY above, a zero-width span > at the start/end of another span should NOT be considered adjacent. > We would say that X is right/left adjacent to Y if it starts/ends at > the same the size of the intersection between X and Y is zero. > That implies that zero-width annotations are NEVER ADJACENT. > > LEFT/RIGHT OVERLAPPING: if an X annotation is left or right overlapping > another annotation Y, it implies that some part of X is outside the > boundaries of Y. That, however, would contradict the choice we made for > covered-by above for zero-width annotations. That implies that a > zero-width annotation at the start/end of another annotation is > NEVER LEFT/RIGHT OVERLAPPING that other annotation. > > LEFT-OF/RIGHT OF: if a zero-width annotation X at the start/end of > another annotation Y is not adjacent because it it covered, than > that implies that is is also not left-of/right-of. > > IMHO these interpretations above are symmetric and also avoid the > odd case of two colocated zero-width spans being simultaneously > left(overlapping) and right(overlapping) etc. of themselves. > > I have added a matrix using the rationales given above in the > Google Sheets document on sheet "Relation types in detail (WN, WWv2)" > in the "Left wide, right wide" column group. > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fgMbqVlxwJSBNui7Y_phtRYEhzr_rfXQ5ZUREH1-nwI/edit?usp=sharing > > Cheers, > > -- Richard -- Dr. Peter Klügl Head of Text Mining/Machine Learning Averbis GmbH Salzstr. 15 79098 Freiburg Germany Fon: +49 761 708 394 0 Fax: +49 761 708 394 10 Email: [email protected] Web: https://averbis.com Headquarters: Freiburg im Breisgau Register Court: Amtsgericht Freiburg im Breisgau, HRB 701080 Managing Directors: Dr. med. Philipp Daumke, Dr. Kornél Markó
