The Effects of Discourse Connectives Prediction on Implicit Discourse Relation Recognition

Implicit discourse relation recognition is difficult due to the absence of explicit discourse connectives between arbitrary spans of text. In this paper, we use language models to predict the discourse connectives between the arguments pair. We present two methods to apply the predicted connectives to implicit discourse relation recognition. One is to use the sense frequency of the specific connectives in a supervised framework. The other is to directly use the presence of the predicted connectives in an unsupervised way. Results on PDTB2 show that using language model to predict the connectives can achieve comparable F-scores to the previous state-of-art method. Our method is quite promising in that not only it has a very small number of features but also once a language model based on other resources is trained it can be more adaptive to other languages and domains.

[1]  Jason Baldridge,et al.  Probabilistic Head-Driven Parsing for Discourse Structure , 2005, CoNLL.

[2]  Mirella Lapata,et al.  Inferring Sentence-internal Temporal Relations , 2004, NAACL.

[3]  Hwee Tou Ng,et al.  Recognizing Implicit Discourse Relations in the Penn Discourse Treebank , 2009, EMNLP.

[4]  Jan Alexandersson,et al.  Proceedings of the 7th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue , 2009, SIGDIAL 2009.

[5]  Sasha J. Blair-Goldensohn,et al.  Long-answer question answering and rhetorical-semantic relations , 2007 .

[6]  Alex Lascarides,et al.  Edinburgh Research Explorer Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: an assessment , 2022 .

[7]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  Classification of Discourse Coherence Relations: An Exploratory Study using Multiple Knowledge Sources , 2006, SIGDIAL Workshop.

[8]  Daniel Marcu,et al.  An Unsupervised Approach to Recognizing Discourse Relations , 2002, ACL.

[9]  Ani Nenkova,et al.  Automatic sense prediction for implicit discourse relations in text , 2009, ACL.

[10]  Alan Lee,et al.  Annotating Attribution in the Penn Discourse TreeBank , 2006 .

[11]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  The Penn Discourse TreeBank 2.0. , 2008, LREC.

[12]  Roxana Gîrju,et al.  Automatic Detection of Causal Relations for Question Answering , 2003, ACL 2003.

[13]  Daniel Marcu,et al.  Sentence Level Discourse Parsing using Syntactic and Lexical Information , 2003, NAACL.

[14]  Ani Nenkova,et al.  Using Syntax to Disambiguate Explicit Discourse Connectives in Text , 2009, ACL.

[15]  Ani Nenkova,et al.  Easily Identifiable Discourse Relations , 2008, COLING.

[16]  Daniel Marcu,et al.  Building a Discourse-Tagged Corpus in the Framework of Rhetorical Structure Theory , 2001, SIGDIAL Workshop.

[17]  Treebank Penn,et al.  Linguistic Data Consortium , 1999 .

[18]  Martin F. Porter,et al.  An algorithm for suffix stripping , 1997, Program.

[19]  Satoshi Sekine,et al.  Using Phrasal Patterns to Identify Discourse Relations , 2006, HLT-NAACL.