Hi,
storing pointers to the subconstituents (top down) might be an
alternative - which is quite straightforward. However, if you don't plan
to disambiguate the tree there may be sets of pointers.
There is also a second alternative that works without saving the
pointers in the feature structures at all: the method tree
<http://incubator.apache.org/uima/downloads/releaseDocs/2.2.2-incubating/docs/api/org/apache/uima/cas/text/AnnotationIndex.html#tree%28org.apache.uima.cas.text.AnnotationFS%29>
in the AnnotationIndex. However, care has to be taken in order to avoid
endless recursion (in case of multiple annotations having the same span)
here. To achieve this consult the reference manual
<http://incubator.apache.org/uima/downloads/releaseDocs/2.2.2-incubating/docs/html/references/references.html>
about type priorities.
I would be glad to hear, what solution you chose
Good luck
Matthias
Ramon Ziai schrieb:
Hi UIMAers,
I was wondering about the best way to go about representing parse
constituents in the CAS. What are the common practices?
I'm aware of the approach taken by the JULIE lab (Hahn et al., 2007a)
which involves storing parent pointers in constituent annotations.
However, that seems to imply "collecting" the trees bottom-up which may
be inconvenient. Also, it's unclear to me how multiple possible parses
are to be stored and retrieved.
Any ideas or pointers are welcome.
Best,
Ramon
--
--------------------------------
Matthias Wendt
Junior Softwareentwickler
F&E
neofonie
Technologieentwicklung und
Informationsmanagement GmbH
Robert-Koch-Platz 4
10115 Berlin
fon: +49.30 24627 529
fax: +49.30 24627 120
[email protected]
http://www.neofonie.de
Handelsregister
Berlin-Charlottenburg: HRB 67460
Geschaeftsfuehrung
Helmut Hoffer von Ankershoffen
Nurhan Yildirim
Uwe-Gernot Fasold
--------------------------------
