Hi Armin, this is exactly what I'm just asking myself, too.
I've added Named Entities as standard UIMA Annotation types (with begin/set end set accordingly). Then I've tried to create a new Relation type that contains the two arguments as references to the two NER annotations, i.e. added two features: mention1 (type NER), mention2 (type NER). However, the problem is that I don't see the Relation in the document Analyzer -- I have expected somehow that the two NER's would show up. If I set the begin/end of the Relation to the argument's begin and end, then I do see it in the document analyzer, but of course I do get all the textspan in between (and including) the two entities highlighted. However, I somehow expect that's not the proper way to handle it in UIMA... Rather, there is this 'not just annotations' type (i.e. the Relation object should be a subclass of TOP and not of Annotation, as it is a more abstract type without begin/end), as mentioned in http://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.4.0/overview_and_setup.html#ugr.ovv.conceptual.metadata_in_cas Section 2.3.2.2. Not Just Annotations. However, I've tried that and stil I don't see it in the analyzer. What am I doing wrong? i.e. what's the correct way of using an abstract (non-annotation) type in UIMA whose parts actually correctly show up in the document Analyzer? Thanks for help. B. On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 1:30 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there, > > is there any standard or best practice for adding relations of annotations > to a CAS? I've annotated named entities in text documents. Now I'd like to > have relations between the named entities as well. > > Regards, > > Armin > >
