arXiv preprint ·
Correction as Annotation: Bootstrapping a Dependency Parser for Documentary Medieval Latin
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
In brief
Boosting Latin NLP with Fewer Resources
This paper introduces a novel bootstrapping method that leverages expert corrections to significantly enhance parsing accuracy. By generating in-domain training data from previous models, the authors achieved remarkable improvements in performance while drastically reducing the amount of training data needed.
What they found: The study demonstrated a remarkable increase in parsing accuracy for medieval Latin texts, achieving a universal part-of-speech accuracy of 98% and a labelled attachment score of 92%. This was accomplished with just 33 hours of annotation effort on 1,804 sentences, showcasing the method's efficiency. Overall, the approach outperformed existing models while using 97% less training data, making it a game-changer for historical text analysis.
AI-written summary. Check anything you rely on against the original paper.
Abstract
Medieval documentary sources remain inadequately served by existing natural language processing tools. None of the five readily available Latin treebank models attains usable performance on a collection of 160 inventories compiled in Marseille between 1258 and 1446. The best labelled attachment score is 0.62 and the best morphology-aware score is 0.24. Performance does not correlate with either genre or period proximity. To address this shortfall, in-domain training data was generated as a by-product of using these inadequate models. In each of nine iterations, a model pre-annotated 200 sentences; an expert corrected the annotations; and the corrected sentences were used to train the subsequent model, with batches sampled independently of model state, without active-learning selection. Thirty-three hours of annotation effort over 1,804 sentences increased universal part-of-speech accuracy from 0.80 to 0.98 and labelled attachment from 0.48 to 0.92, outperforming all baselines on the reported metrics while using 97% less training data than the largest one of them. Annotator effort declined from 54% of tokens to a plateau of 14-18%, an operational progress metric that requires no separate gold standard and can serve as a stopping criterion.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computation & Language / NLP
SurveyAgent-HKA: A multi-agent framework for scientific survey generation with LLMs and human knowledge augmentation
An LLM-Associated Register Shift in Korean Journal Abstracts: A Morphology-Aware Excess-Vocabulary Study, 2018-2026
Same Problem, Different Field: Cross-Domain Solution Import via Domain-Stripped Computational Fingerprints
Measuring the Novelty of Biomedical Papers Using the Latent Distances between Knowledge Units
The Art of Hierarchical Competing Patterns: Gaussian Process Optimization of Hyphenation
Get the few papers worth your time in Computation & Language / NLP every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.