ITU Validation Set for Metu-Sabancı Turkish Treebank

Öz

This paper presents the ITU Turkish Dependency Validation Set firstly introduced in 2007 [36] in order to serve as the test set of the CoNLL-XI shared task (shared task of the Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning 2007 [28] ). The dataset is available from http://web.itu.edu.tr/gulsenc/treebanks.html and is used by several academic studies so far.

Kaynakça

1. [1] Atalay, N. B., Oflazer, K., and Say, B.. 2003. The annotation process in the turkish treebank. In Proceedings of the EACL Workshop on Linguistically Interpreted Corpora.
2. [2] Attardi, G.. 2006. Experiments with a multilanguage non-projective dependency parser. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 166-170, New York.
3. [3] Bick, E.. 2006. LingPars, a Linguistically Inspired, Language-Independent Machine Learner for Dependency Treebanks. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 171-175, New York.
4. [4] Buchholz, S., and Marsi, E.. 2006. Conll-X shared task on multilingual dependency parsing. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 149-164, New York.
5. [5] Çakıcı, R., and Baldridge, J.. 2006. Projective and Non-Projective Turkish Parsing. In Proceedings of the 5th International Treebanks and Linguistic Theories Conference, pages 43-54, Prague.
6. [6] Canisius, S., Bogers, T., Bosch van de, A., Geertzen, J., and Tjong Kim Sang, E.. 2006. Dependency Parsing by Inference over High-recall Dependency Predictions, pages 176-180, New York.
7. [7] Carreras, X., Surdeanu, M., and Marquez, L.. 2006. Projective dependency parsing with perceptron, In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 181-185, New York
8. [8] Chang, M.W., Do, Q., and Roth, D.. 2006. A pipeline model for bottom-up dependency parsing. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 186-190, New York.

9. [9] Cheng, Y., Asahara, M., and Matsumoto, Y.. 2006. Multi-lingual dependency parsing at NAIST. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 191-195, New York.
10. [10] Corston-Oliver, S., and Aue, A.. 2006. Dependency parsing with reference to Slovene, Spanish and Swedish. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 196-200, New York.
11. [11] Dreyer, M., Smith, D. A., and Smith, N. A.. 2006. Vine parsing and minimum risk reranking for speed and precision. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 201-205, New York . [12] Eryiğit, G., and Oflazer, K.. 2006. Statistical dependency parsing of Turkish. In Proceedings of EACL’06, pages 89-96, Trento.
12. [13] Eryiğit, G., Adalı, E., and Oflazer, K.. 2006a. Türkçe cümlelerin kural tabanlı bağlılık analizi (Rule-based dependency parsing of Turkish sentences). In Proceedings of the 15th Turkish Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Neural Networks, pages 17- 24, Muğla.
13. [14] Eryiğit, G., Nivre, J., and Oflazer, K.. 2006b. The incremental use of morphological information and lexicalization in data-driven dependency parsing. Computer Processing of Oriental Languages, Beyond the Orient: The Research Challenges Ahead, Springer, LNAI 4285:498-507.
14. [15] Eryiğit, G.. 2006. Türkçenin Bağlılık Ayrıştırması (Dependency Parsing of Turkish). Ph.D. thesis, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul.
15. [16] Johansson, R. and Nugues P.. 2006. Investigating multilingual dependency parsing. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 206-210, New York
16. [17] Liu, T., Ma, J., Zhu, H., and Li S.. 2006. Dependency parsing based on dynamiz local optimization. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 211-215, New York.
17. [18] McDonald, R., Lerman, K., and Pereira, F.. 2006. Multilingual dependency analysis with a two-stage discriminative parser. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 216-220, New York.
18. [19] Nivre, J., Hall, J.,Nilsson, J., Chanev, A., Eryiğit, G., Kübler, S., Marinov, S., and Marsi, Erwin.. 2007. MaltParser: A language-independent system for datadriven dependency parsing. Natural Language Engineering Journal, 13(1):1-41.
19. [20] Oflazer, K., Say, B., Hakkani-Tür D. Z., and Tür, G.. 2003. Building a Turkish treebank. In A. Abeillé, editor, Treebanks: Building and Using PArsed Corpora, pages 261-277. Kluwer, London.
20. [21] Oflazer, K., 1994. Two-level description of Turkish morphology. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 9(2):137-148.
21. [22] Riedel, S., Çakıcı, R., and Meza-Ru,z, I.. 2006. Multilingual dependency parsing with incremental integer linear programming. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 226-230, New York.
22. [23] Say, B.. 2004. Metu-sabancı turkish treebank user guide.
23. [24] Schiehlen, M., and Spranger, K.. 2006. Language independent probabilistic context-Free parsing bolstered by machine learning. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 231-235, New York.
24. [25] Shimizu, N.. 2006. Maximum spanning tree algorithm for non-projective labeled dependency parsing. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 241-245, New York
25. [26] Wu, Y.C., Lee, Y.S., and Yang, J.C.. 2006. The exploriation of deterministic and efficient dependency parsing. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 241-245, New York.
26. [27] Yüret, D.. 2006. Dependency parsing as a classification problem. In Proceedings of CONLL-X, pages 246-250, New York.
27. [28] Nivre, J., Hall, J., Kübler, S., McDonald, R., Nilsson, J., Riedel S., and Yüret, D. 2007. The CoNLL 2007 shared task on dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the CoNLL Shared Task Session of EMNLP-CoNLL, pages 915-932. Prague.
28. [29] Meral, H. M., Sankur, B., Özsoy, A. S., Güngör, T., and Sevinç, E. 2009. Natural language watermaking via morphosyntactic alterations. Retrieved from DOI: 10.1016/j.csl.2008.04.001
29. [30] Eryiğit, G., İlbay, T., and Can, O. A. 2011. Multiword expressions in statistical dependency parsing. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically Rich Languages(SPMRL), pages 45-55. Dublin, Ireland.
30. [31] Eryiğit, G.. The impact of automatic morphological analysis & disambiguation on dependency parsing of Turkish. 2012.
31. [32] Çetinoğlu, Ö., and Kuhn, J. 2013. Towards joint morphological analysis and dependency parsing of Turkish. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Dependency Linguistics(DepLing), pages 23-32. Prague.
32. [33] Goenaga, I., Ezeiza, N., and Gojenola, K. 2013. Exploiting the Contribution of Morphological Information to Parsing: the BASQUE_TEAM system in the SPRML’2013 Shared Task.In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically Rich Languages, pages 71-77. Seattle, Washington, USA.
33. [34] Durgar El-Kahlout, İ., Akın, A.A., and Yılmaz, E. 2014. Initial explorations in two-phase Turkish dependency parsing by incorporating constituents. In First Joint Workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically Rich Languages and Syntactic Analysis of Non-Canonical Languages, pages 82-89. Dublin, Ireland.
34. [35] Çetinoğlu, Ö. Turkish Treebank as a gold standard for morphological disambiguation and its influence on parsing. [36] Eryiğit, G. 2007. ITU Validation Set for Metu-Sabancı Turkish Treebank.