Please send us PR to update the documentation. We are always happy about new contributors.
We have an annotation service which can be called from BRAT. There are no tools to produce brat output otherwise. Jörn On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 11:42 PM, Benedict Holland <benedict.m.holl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > That is exactly what I assumed but that information isn't included in the > documentation. > > Also, if there a way to integrate the name finder with brat annotation to > create brat annotated files using a name finder, that would superb to put > within the documentation as well. > > BTW, this circular analysis is genuinely amazing. I am incredibly > impressed. > > Thanks, > ~Ben > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 4:13 PM, Gary Underwood <gunderw...@clinacuity.com> > wrote: > >> I like to think of it as providing examples of what is NOT what you are >> wanting tags. >> Gary Underwood >> gunderw...@clinacuity.com >> >> >> >> > On Oct 6, 2017, at 3:50 PM, Joern Kottmann <kottm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > It is like Daniel says and it is good to have training data that is >> > close to the data you intend to process with the model. >> > >> > Jörn >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Dan Russ <danrus...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I believe it does. Every word is classified as “begin”, “inside”, or >> “outside” - BIO encoding, so an event is generated for “she” and then >> “does” and then “not” — all of which is classified as “outside”. >> >> >> >> Anyone smarter have a comment on this??? >> >> Daniel >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Oct 6, 2017, at 11:26 AM, Benedict Holland < >> benedict.m.holl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hello all, >> >>> >> >>> I am working on getting together a file with a list of tokenized >> sentences. >> >>> I have a quick question: >> >>> >> >>> Can name training data contain sentences without any tags? >> >>> >> >>> For example, if I had a sentence like >> >>> >> >>> <START:person> Molly <END> enjoys pancakes in the morning . >> >>> She does not enjoy being woken up at 4:30 by her cat . >> >>> >> >>> Does the second sentence provide any additional benefit to the ME >> model? >> >>> The answer to this question should probably be in the documentation. >> >>> >> >>> Thanks, >> >>> ~Ben >> >> >> >>
