ctakes-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John Green" <john.travis.gr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: types for hybrid relations
Date Tue, 10 Feb 2015 11:20:17 GMT
Im interested in hearing more about this.

Sent from Mailbox

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Miller, Timothy
<Timothy.Miller@childrens.harvard.edu> wrote:

> The typesystem has a few different basic relations:
> Relation: The base type, it has no information about how many arguments
> or what type of arguments it uses.
> BinaryTextRelation: Between 2 RelationArgument objects, which are
> wrappers for UIMA Annotation type (spanned arguments).
> CollectionTextRelation: Between a set of RelationArgument objects
> (Annotation)
> ElementRelation: Between 2 Element objects, which are non-spanned types,
> with pointers to mentions.
> AttributeRelation: Between an Element and an Attribute, which is a type
> of Element.
> However, as far as I can tell there is no relation type which would
> allow for a link between an Annotation and an Element. This use case
> comes up in certain models of coreference resolution, where you attempt
> to link new mentions back to clusters instead of to individual mentions.
> I am interested in trying out models of this type and was going to
> extend RelationExtractorAnnotator but I think the typesystem doesn't
> have what we need for this case. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong,
> but I would propose to modify the typesystem to make such relations
> possible.
> Thanks
> Tim
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message