uima-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Tanenblatt <sloth...@park-slope.net>
Subject Re: ConceptMapper and POS
Date Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:16:27 GMT

On Mar 10, 2011, at 12:14 PM, Chris wrote:

> Michael Tanenblatt <slothrop@...> writes:
>> I hope I get this right, as it's been a while since I've done this:
>> Assume you have a token annotation that has a feature containing a POS tag as 
> a string value, and that feature
>> is called "posTag". If you want to use that to limit your lookups, you would 
> set the parameter
>> "TokenClassFeatureName" to "posTag" and then you would use the 
> "IncludedTokenClasses" parameter to
>> list all of the values of that posTag feature that would indicate the token 
> should be included in the lookup
>> (conversely, you could use the "ExcludedTokenClasses" to indicate those to 
> ignore during lookup).
>> Specifying the POS tag in the dictionary is a way to override the tagger, 
> assuming your tagger doesn't
>> overwrite existing tags, that's all. ConceptMapper does not handle POS tags in 
> any special way, they are
>> just features, like any other feature.
>> Does this make sense?
>> On Mar 9, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Chris wrote:
>>> The documentation for the ConceptMapper annotator discusses the possibility 
> of 
>>> limiting matches to specific parts of speech.  If I understand correctly, by

>>> specifying a POS value in a ConceptMapper dictionary entry, I can filter 
>>> matches to just those tokens that have been tagged with the specified POS 
>>> value (as supplied, in my case, by running the OpenNLP POS Tagger before 
>>> ConceptMapper).  In practice, however, specifying POS attribute values for 
> my 
>>> dictionary entries does not appear to have the desired effect.
>>> Am I misunderstanding what the POS attribute does in ConceptMapper?  Perhaps

>>> it is meant only to use in the "write-back" capabilities of the annotator to

>>> populate/overwrite a POS attribute in a matched token instead of acting as a

>>> filter?
>>> Any help is appreciated in better understanding what role POS plays in the 
>>> execution of ConceptMapper.
>>> Thanks... 
> That makes sense - thanks.  I was hoping that it acted as an additional matching 
> agent for variants - for example, being able to say that a match is only valid 
> when the POS specified in the dictionary for a variant matched the pre-populated 
> POS for the token annotation - but sounds like that was not how it was intended 
> to be used.
> Thanks for the help. 

Well, it *is* open source--you could enhance it...
View raw message