uima-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Klügl <pklu...@uni-wuerzburg.de>
Subject Re: Ruta partofneq
Date Sat, 28 Feb 2015 16:32:15 GMT
Thank you. I try to take a look at it this weekend.

Best,

Peter

Am 27.02.2015 um 14:40 schrieb Silvestre Losada:
> Hi,
>
> I submited a patch with a solution for the error reported
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-4261
>
> Best
>
> On 25 February 2015 at 10:41, Silvestre Losada <silvestre.losada@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Done
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-4261
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24 February 2015 at 19:35, Peter Klügl <pkluegl@uni-wuerzburg.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> could you open an issue and attach it there? That would be great.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> Am 24.02.2015 um 18:13 schrieb Silvestre Losada:
>>>
>>>   Hi Peter,
>>>> The problem happens if the Annotations are created by external analysis
>>>> engine, using something like this
>>>>
>>>> ENGINE TestAE;
>>>> Document{-> EXEC(TestAE,{TestType})};
>>>> (TestType{-> UNMARKALL(TestType)}){PARTOFNEQ(TestType)};
>>>>
>>>> It seems that  ExecAction is removing the Type form RutaBasic.partOf
>>>> array
>>>> at some point of the execution. After that in PartOfNeqCondition in
>>>> method
>>>> check next condition is always returning false because the Type was
>>>> removed
>>>> previously from ruta basic.
>>>>
>>>>       boolean partOf = beginAnchor.isPartOf(t) || endAnchor.isPartOf(t);
>>>>       if (!partOf) {
>>>>         return false;
>>>>       }
>>>>
>>>> I have uima ruta test project that reproduces the error I can send to you
>>>> in zip file.
>>>>
>>>> Best.
>>>>
>>>> On 20 February 2015 at 20:41, Peter Klügl <pkluegl@uni-wuerzburg.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   Hi,
>>>>> hmmm, that's strange. When I apply the rules on the document "A B C D",
>>>>> only one T1 annotation remains.
>>>>>
>>>>> On which document did you test the rules?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 20.02.2015 um 09:17 schrieb Silvestre Losada:
>>>>>
>>>>>    HI again,
>>>>>
>>>>>> Now I'm running into this problem
>>>>>> DECLARE T1;
>>>>>> "A B C D" -> T1;
>>>>>> "B" -> T1;
>>>>>> "C D" -> T1;
>>>>>> "D" -> T1;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (T1{-> UNMARKALL(T1)}){PARTOFNEQ(T1)};
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The ouput is
>>>>>> "A B C D" -> T1;
>>>>>> "D" -> T1;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suspect that this is because D is part of "A B C D" and "C D"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Im using lastest version in trunk.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14 February 2015 at 09:29, Silvestre Losada <
>>>>>> silvestre.losada@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    Thanks Peter,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems to work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 13 February 2015 at 22:18, Peter Klügl <pkluegl@uni-wuerzburg.de>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    This should work just fine and should remove both contained
>>>>>>> annotations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I just tested it with the current trunk and the following
script:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> DECLARE T1;
>>>>>>>> "A B" -> T1;
>>>>>>>> "B" -> T1;
>>>>>>>> "B" -> T1;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (T1{-> UNMARK(T1)}){PARTOFNEQ(T1)};
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If applied on the test "A B", only the largest annotation
remains.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can you test it with the current trunk in case I fixed the
bug a few
>>>>>>>> minutes ago by accident. If not, can you give me more information
>>>>>>>> about
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> context of your rule?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 12.02.2015 um 10:12 schrieb Silvestre Losada:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     I dont know if this is a bug or if it is wokring well.
I have the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   following
>>>>>>>>> annotations.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> AnnotationA
>>>>>>>>>          begin:0
>>>>>>>>>          ends:8
>>>>>>>>>           id:1
>>>>>>>>> AnnotationA
>>>>>>>>>          begin:4
>>>>>>>>>          ends:8
>>>>>>>>>           id:2
>>>>>>>>> AnnotationA
>>>>>>>>>          begin: 4
>>>>>>>>>          ends:8
>>>>>>>>>           id:3
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then if apply the following ruta
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (AnnotationA{-> UNMARK(AnnotationA)}){PARTOFNEQ(AnnotationA)};
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The output is
>>>>>>>>> AnnotationA
>>>>>>>>>          begin:0
>>>>>>>>>          ends:8
>>>>>>>>>           id:1
>>>>>>>>> AnnotationA
>>>>>>>>>          begin: 4
>>>>>>>>>          ends:8
>>>>>>>>>           id:3
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I expect that annotations with id 2 and 3 will be removed.
Is there
>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>>> to remove both
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>


Mime
View raw message