Natural Logic for Textual Inference

This paper presents the first use of a computational model of natural logic---a system of logical inference which operates over natural language---for textual inference. Most current approaches to the PASCAL RTE textual inference task achieve robustness by sacrificing semantic precision; while broadly effective, they are easily confounded by ubiquitous inferences involving monotonicity. At the other extreme, systems which rely on first-order logic and theorem proving are precise, but excessively brittle. This work aims at a middle way. Our system finds a low-cost edit sequence which transforms the premise into the hypothesis; learns to classify entailment relations across atomic edits; and composes atomic entailments into a top-level entailment judgment. We provide the first reported results for any system on the FraCaS test suite. We also evaluate on RTE3 data, and show that hybridizing an existing RTE system with our natural logic system yields significant performance gains.

[1]  Jerry R. Hobbs Ontological Promiscuity , 1985, ACL.

[2]  Victor Sanchez,et al.  Studies on Natural Logic and Categorial Grammar , 1991 .

[3]  Stephen Pulman,et al.  Using the Framework , 1996 .

[4]  Nissim Francez,et al.  Order-Based Inference in Natural Logic , 2003, Log. J. IGPL.

[5]  Dan Klein,et al.  Accurate Unlexicalized Parsing , 2003, ACL.

[6]  Jana Z. Sukkarieh,et al.  An Expressive Efficient Representation: Bridging a Gap between NLP and KR , 2003, KES.

[7]  G. Lakoff Linguistics and natural logic , 1970, Synthese.

[8]  Dan I. Moldovan,et al.  Applying COGEX to Recognize Textual Entailment , 2005, MLCW.

[9]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Recognizing Textual Entailment Using Lexical Similarity , 2005 .

[10]  Elena Akhmatova,et al.  Textual Entailment Resolution via Atomic Propositions , 2005 .

[11]  Andrew Hickl,et al.  Recognizing Textual Entailment with LCC’s G ROUNDHOG System , 2005 .

[12]  Jan van Eijck,et al.  Natural Logic for Natural Language , 2007, TbiLLC.

[13]  Emiel Krahmer,et al.  Classification of Semantic Relations by Humans and Machines , 2005, EMSEE@ACL.

[14]  Ido Dagan,et al.  The Third PASCAL Recognizing Textual Entailment Challenge , 2007, ACL-PASCAL@ACL.

[15]  Nissim Francez,et al.  A ‘Natural Logic’ inference system using the Lambek calculus , 2006, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[16]  Ido Dagan,et al.  Investigating a Generic Paraphrase-Based Approach for Relation Extraction , 2006, EACL.

[17]  Roger Levy,et al.  Tregex and Tsurgeon: tools for querying and manipulating tree data structures , 2006, LREC.

[18]  Christopher D. Manning,et al.  Learning to recognize features of valid textual entailments , 2006, NAACL.

[19]  Learning to distinguish valid textual entailments , 2006 .

[20]  J. V. Benthem Johan van Benthem , 2008 .

[21]  K. Markert,et al.  When logical inference helps determining textual entailment ( and when it doesn ’ t ) , .