bucharest, 30 july 2003 computational lexicons and the semantic web alessandro lenci università di...
Post on 11-Jan-2016
213 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Computational Lexicons and
the Semantic Web
Alessandro Lenci
Università di Pisa – Department of Linguistics
&
Istituto di Linguistica Computazionale - CNR
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Tutorial Outline
Computational lexicons for the Semantic Web (SW) how they are how they should be
The SW for computational lexicons lexicon design in the age of the SW
Training session case study – lexical modelling in RDF/S
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
The Semantic Web Vision
Semantic Web
Turning the WWW into a machine understandable knowledge base
Ontologies
KnowledgeMarkup
IntelligentAgents
Applications
Documents
Databases
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Six Challenges for the SW(Benjamins et al. 2002)
1. Content availability
2. Ontology availability
3. Multilinguality
4. Scalability
5. Visualization
6. Stability of SW languages
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Six Challenges for the SW(Benjamins et al. 2002)
1. Content availability
2. Ontology availability
3. Multilinguality
4. Scalability
5. Visualization
6. Stability of SW languages
Human LanguageTechnology
(HLT)
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Lexical Information and HLT
All language analysis involves determining meaning at some level Anything from groups of related words to a full-blown
representation of each sentence
bank…………… ………account………………………money…………
Information retrieval
Topic = financial John went to the store
GO
AGENT John TARGET store
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Computational Lexicons and HLT
Explicit representation of word meaning word content accessible to computational agents
Word meaning linked to word syntax and morphology
Multilingual lexical links
Computational lexicons provide machine understandable word knowledge
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Contain the linguistic information required to build meaning representations
bank…………… ………account………………………money…………
account n. domain [financial]account v. …bank_1 n. domain: [financial]bank_2 n. domain: [geography]money n. domain: [financial]
Lexicon went vpast GOgo v. (NP_SUBJ ((role AGENT) (sem +animate)) (VP ((verb GO) (PP ((prep TO) (NP ((role TARGET) (sem +loc)))))John n. sem : humanstore n. sem: loc
Lexicon
John went to the store
GO
AGENT John TARGET store
Topic = financial
Computational Lexicons and HLT
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Critical language resources for NLP systems syntactic subcategorization frames for parsing semantic selectional preferences for ambiguity
reduction semantic classes for WSD, semantic tagging, etc.
Key components of HLT monolingual lexicons – IE, QA, etc. multilingual lexicons – MT, CLIR, etc.
Computational Lexicons and HLT
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Ontologies and Computational Lexicons
Semantic Web
OntologiesComputational
Lexicons
HLTAccess toContent
?
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Ontologies
An ontology is a system of concepts relevant for knowledge and action in (a portion of) the world categorization of objects and processes inference action planning …
“An ontology is a specification of a conceptualization”(Gruber 1993)
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Ontologies
OBJECT
EVENT
LOCATION
ARTIFACT
ANIMAL
ENTITY
“A set of knowledge terms, including the vocabulary, the semantic interconnections,
and some simple rule of inference and logic”(Hendler 2001)
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Types of Ontologies
Foundational Ontology
Domain Core Ontology
Domain Specific Ontology
OBJECT
SOFTWARE
WORD_PROCESSOR
Horizontal typology:
Information System ontology
AI ontology
Linguistic ontology
Vertical typology:
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Linguistic Ontology
A system of symbols representing the concepts (meanings) encoded by NL expressions (lexical units, terms, etc.) specify semantic classes grouping semantically similar terms semantic representation language interlingua
OBJECT
EVENT
LOCATION
ARTIFACT
ANIMAL
ENTITY
VEHICLE
MAMMAL
BEACH
CONCERT
dog, cat, horse
car, van, truck
beach
piano concert, rock concert
spiaggia
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Language/s
Ontologies and Computational Lexicons
ConceptSpace
Ontology
ComputationalLexicon
Semantics
Syntax
Morphology
Multilinguality
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Computational Lexiconstipology
Monolingual vs. multilingual General purpose vs. domain (application) specific Content type
(Morpho)-Syntactic Semantic Mixed Terminological
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Syntactic Computational Lexicons
Syntactic lexical information is distilled in subcategorization frames
ComLex, PAROLE, etc.
Syntactic frames typically include: number of selected arguments syntactic categories of their realizations (PP, NP, etc.) lexical constraints on argument realization (e.g. preposition heading
a PP) argument functional role (Subj, Obj, etc.) optionality, control, auxiliary selection, etc.
hit [V: (Subj: NP) (Objd: NP)]answer [N: (Obji: PP_to)]
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Semantic Computational Lexicons
Representing the meaning of a word (minimally) requires Distinguishing different senses of the word
E.g. bank : finacial institution vs. geographical configuration Capturing inferences
E.g. being human implies being animate Representing similarity of meaning with other words
E.g. bank, account, money all related to finances
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Semantic Computational Lexicons
Mikrokosmos (Nirenburg, Mahesh et al.) WordNet (Miller, Fellbaum et al.)
EuroWordNet (Vossen et al.)
SIMPLE (Calzolari, Lenci et al.) FrameNet (Fillmore et al.)
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Computational Lexiconsdesign issues
Network based hierarchy (taxonomy)
WordNet heterarchy
EuroWordNet
Frame based Mikrokosmos FrameNet
Hybrid SIMPLE
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
EuroWordNet
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
EuroWordNetTop Ontology
skinhairbody-covering
Top
1stOrderEntity 2ndOrderEntity
SituationType SituationComponent
Living
Location ExperiencePhysicalStatic DynamicNaturalCovering Part Group
Composition OriginFunction Form
Etc….Etc.
bodypartcellmuscleorgan
Object
Human
Mental
Directiondistancespatial propertyspatial relationcoursepath
change of positiondividelocomotionmotion
feeldesiredisturbanceemotionfeelinghumorpleasance
churchcompanyinstituteorganizationpartyunion
humanadultadult femaleadult malechildnativeoffspring
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
EuroWordNet
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
PAROLE-SIMPLE Lexicons
12 EU monolingual core lexicons built according to a harmonized model and further extended at the national level
Integrated combinations of syntactic and semantic information: syntactic subcategorization frames semantic type (“Ontology”) semantic frames linked to syntax
semantic roles selectional preferences etc.
semantic relations Pustejovsky’s “qualia roles”, etc. regular polysemy event structure
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Italian lexicon
etc.
Greek lexiconGreek lexicon
PAROLE Syntax
Italian lexiconItalian lexicon
Catalan lexiconCatalan lexicon
SIMPLE Architecture
OntologyLexical
Templates
Language Independent Module
SemU
SemanticRelations
EventStructure
Polysemy
Semantic Frame(semantic roles, etc.)
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Top
Formal Constitutive Agentive Telic
Is_a Is_a_part_of Property
Contains
Created_by Agentive_cause Indirect_telic Activity
Instrumental Is_the_habit_of
Used_for Used_as
... ...
SIMPLEsemantic relations
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
<parte>part
Isa
Isa
Isa
<volare>fly
Used_for
Used_for
<aeroplano>airplane
Is_a_part_of
<uccello>bird
Is_a_part_of
<edificio>building
Is_a_part_of
Ala (wing)
SemU: 3232Type: [Part]Part of an airplane
SemU: 3268Type: [Part]Part of a building
SemU: D358Type: [Body_part]Organ of birds for flying
SemU: 3467Type: [Role]Role in football
<giocatore>player
Isa
Agentive
SIMPLEsemantic network
<fabbricare>make
Agentive
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
SIMPLEsemantic frames
PREDemploy#1
Arg#1<AGENT - HUMAN>
Arg#2<PATIENT - HUMAN>
SemU
employer
SemU
employee
SemU
employment
SemU
to employ
agentnominalization
patientnominalization
eventnominalization
master link
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Comprendere V
SemU: 61725
Type: [Cognitive_event]
To understand
SemU: 6962
Type: [Constitutive_state]
To include
Comprensione N
SemU: 61726
Type: [Cognitive_event]
Understanding
SIMPLEsemantic frames
PREDComprendere#1 <Arg1 [+human]>, <Arg2 [+semiotic]>
PREDComprendere#2<Arg1 [+Entity]>, <Arg2[Entity]>
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
il difensore di Berlusconi (Berlusconi's defender)
il difensore del Milan (the Milan fullback)
Difensore N
SemU: 4125
Type: [Role]
Defender
SemU: 3526
Type: [Role]
Fullback
agentnominalization
<squadra>teamIs_a_member_of
SIMPLEsemantic frames
PREDDifendere#1<Arg1>, <Arg2>
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Semantic multidimensionality
Identification of the semantic contribution of an NP requires to access a rich representation of semantic content of the nominal heads
The “semantic structure” of the nominal head determines the semantic relation expressed by a modifying PP (in Italian):
1. la pagina del libro (the page of the book)
2. il difensore del Milan (the Juventus fullback)
3. il suonatore di liuto (the lute player)
4. il tavolo di legno (the wooden table)
PART-OF
MEMBER-OF
TELICMADE-OF
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
SIMPLEsample entries
semantic frame
semantic relations
ontology
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Computational Lexiconsloose ends
Non-compositional aspects in the lexicon collocations, terms, MWEs, etc.
Integration between lexicons and corpus data lexical tuning, data-driven lexicon population, etc.
Semantic dynamics (polysemy, lexical creativity, etc.) “context-sensitivity” of meaning as a challenge for lexical
semantics sense enumeration vs. sense generation heavy smoker, heavy book, heavy road, heavy sea, heavy wine, heavy sky,
heavy artillery, etc.
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Computational Lexiconsloose ends
Semantic type system for lexical senses must account for a non-static kaleidoscope of senses
Salience of aspects of meaning differ for different types natural kinds Is-a; artifacts function
Possible solutions: multiple layers of representation explicit identification of information so that NLP systems can
access what is needed at a given time “dynamic type systems”
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Computational Lexiconsnew challenges from the SW
From language resources for HLT to knowledge resources for inferential engines in-depth lexical description for better content understanding
Content interoperability between computational lexicons better integration between lexical information from different
sources
Beyond the lexical information bottleneck automatic lexical knowledge acquisition
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Lexical Inferences
“Midfielder Scott Sellars was sold to Blackburn for $35,000 and was bought back in the summer for $750,000.”
(FrameNet Corpus)
$35,000:
SellarsScott Midfielder :
Blackburn:
buy:
1
money
goods
buyer
event
e
$750,000:
SellarsScott Midfielder :
Blackburn:
buy:
2
money
goods
seller
event
e
after e1:OWN (buyer, goods)NOT(OWN (buyer, money))
after e2:NOT(OWN (seller, goods))OWN (seller, money)
e1 < e2
TIME e2 = SUMMER
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Hot Topics
In-depth lexical analysis e.g. X buys Y from Z at t ==> Z owns Y before t &
X owns Y after t Key issues at the lexicon-grammar interface
predicate event structure states, processes, accomplishments, etc.
temporal adverbs and temporal expressions e.g. in three years, etc.
quantificational expressions etc. syntax-semantics argument linking
To provide SW agents with high inferential capacities in accessing linguistic content
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Computational Lexicons and
the Semantic Web
Part 2
Lexicon Design in the Age of the Semantic Web
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Lexicons of the Future
General purpose portable over different domains
Multilingual relations among lexical entities in different languages
Flexible and extensible enable use of information at appropriate granularity for the
application enable continual extension : “dynamic”
Integrated with Web technology content interoperability
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Lexical Content Interoperability
SIMPLE
WordNet
FrameNet
The Lexical WebEnable universal access to lexical information
IntelligentAgents
EuroWordNet
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Some Requirements for Lexical Content Interoperability
Compatibility between different models of lexical analysis relational semantic models (e.g. WordNet) Syntactic and semantic frames …
Compatibility between different degrees of lexical specification deep lexical representations (e.g. PAROLE-SIMPLE) shallow semantic descriptions
Compatibility between different paradigms of multilinguality lexicons for transfer-based MT interlingua-based lexicons …
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
The Need for Standards
To represent common information ……while keeping flexibility
To enhance the sharing and reusability of multilingual lexical resources
To establish an open environment for the development and integration of multilingual resources
Information must be consistent with related technologies in order to take advantage of them XML, RDF/S, etc.
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
International Standards for Language Engineering
Computational Lexicon Working Group (CLWG)
Definition of standards for multilingual computational lexicons both at the content
and at the representational level
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
EAGLES guidelines for syntactic and semantic lexiconsGENELEX
Model
PAROLE-SIMPLELexicons
MultilingualLexicons
(EuroWordNet, etc.) MILE Lexical Model
ISLE
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
The MILE Lexical Model
A general architecture to foster the content interoperability between multilingual computational lexicons
Key issues: Modularity User-adaptability Resource sharing Reusability
SW technologies and standards applied at lexicon modelling
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
The MILE Lexical Model (MLM)
The MLM core is the Multilingual ISLE Lexical Entry (MILE) a general schema for multilingual lexical resources a lexical meta-entry as a common representational layer for
multilingual lexicons Computational lexicons can be viewed as different
instances of the MILE schema
MILELexical Model
lexicon#1 lexicon#3lexicon#2
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MILEthe building-block model
The MILE architecture is designed according to the building-block model: Lexical entries are obtained by combining various types
of lexical objects (atomic and complex) Users design their lexicon by:
selecting and/or specifying the relevant lexical objects combine the lexical objects into lexical entries
Lexical objects may be shared: within the same lexicon (intra-lexicon reusability) among different lexicons (inter-lexicon reusability)
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
syntacticframe
phraseslot Synfeature
Lexical Objects
Semfeature
MILEthe building-block model
Lexical entry 1 Lexical entry 2 Lexical entry 3
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Modularity in MILE
morphologicallayer
syntactic layer
semantic layer
linkingconditions
mono-Mile
multi-MILE
multilingualcorrespondence
conditions
mono-Mile
multiple levels of
modularity
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
The Mono-MILE
Each monolingual layer within Mono-MILE identifies a basic unit of lexical description
morphological layer MU
basic unit to describe the inflectional and derivational morphological properties of the word
syntactic layer SynU
basic unit to describe the syntactic behavior of the MU
semantic layer SemUbasic unit to describe the semantic properties of the MU
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
The Mono-MILE
MU
SynU
SynU
SynU
SynU
SemUSemU
SemU
SemUSemU
SemU
SemU
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Syntax-Semantics Linking
CorrespSynUSemU
linkingSlot_0:Arg_1
Slot_1:Arg_0
SemU
Predicate
Arg_0
Arg_1
SynU
Self
Slot_1
Slot_0
filters&
conditions Expressed by pointing to syntactic and semantic elements
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Syntax-Semantics Linking
John gave the book to Mary
John gave Mary the book
SynU#1
obj_NP obl_PP_to
SemU#1
Semantic_Frame:GIVE
Arg1Agent
subj_NP
SynU#2
obj_NP obj_NPsubj_NP
Arg2Theme
Arg3Goal
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
The Multi-MILE
Open to various approaches to multilinguality transfer-based
monolingual descriptions are used to state complex correspondences (tests and actions) between source and target entries
interlingua-based monolingual entries linked to language-independent
lexical objects (e.g. semantic frames, “primitive predicates”, etc.)
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MU_1
SynU_2
SemU_2
SynU_1
SemU_1
Italianmono-MILE IT-to-EN multi-MILE
Multi-MILE
IT_SemU_2 En_SemU_1
IT_SynU_2 En_SynU_1
IT_Slot_0 EN_Slot_1
IT_Slot_1 EN_Slot_0
MU_1
SynU_1
SemU_1
Englishmono-MILE
AddFeature to source SemU
+HUMAN
AddSlot to target SynU
MODIF [PP_with]
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Multi-MILE
dito
finger
toe
modif(mano)
modif(piede)
multilingual conditions
run + PP_intoentrare“to enter” +PP_di_corsa
multilingual conditions
IT Lexicon EN Lexicon
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Defining the MLM
The MLM is designed as an E-R model (MILE Entry Schema) defines the lexical objects and the ways they can be
combined into a lexical entry The MLM includes two types of lexical
objects: MILE Lexical Classes (MLC) MILE Lexical Data Categories (MDC)
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MILE Lexical Classes
Represent the main building blocks of lexical entries Define an ontology of lexical objects
represent lexical notions such as semantic unit, syntactic feature, syntactic frame, semantic predicate, semantic relation, synset, etc.
Similar to class definitions in OO languages specify the relevant attributes define the relations with other classes hierarchically structured
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MILE Lexical Classesan ontology of lexical objects
MLM:SemU
id: xs:anyURI comment: xs:string example: xs:string
MLM:Synset correspondsToSynset
*
MLM:SemanticFrame
MLM:semValues
hasSemanticFrame
0..1
MLM:SemU semURelation
*
MLM:SemURelation
MLM:Collocation hasCollocation
*
semFeature
*
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MILE Lexical Data Categories
MDC are instances of the MILE lexical Classes Each MDC respresents a resource
uniquely identified by a URI Two types of MDC:
Core MDC belong to shared repositories (Lexical Data Category Registry) lexical objects and linguistic notions with wide consensus
User Defined MLDC user-specific or language specific lexical objects
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MILE Lexical Data Categories
MLM:Feature
MLM:SemFeature
MLM:SynFeature
HUMANARTIFACTUALEVENTDURATIONGROUP
AGEANIMATE
instance_of
Core
UserDefined
MDC
GENDERCASEPERSONTENSECONTROL
ASPECT
Core
UserDefined
instance_of
MDC
MLM:GrammaticalFunction
SUBJOBJIOBJPREDX_COMPC_COMP
Core
UserDefined
instance_of
MDC
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Defining the MLM
MILEEntry Schema
MILE LexicalClasses
User DefinedMDC
MDCRegistry
RDF/SDescriptions
Monolingual/MultilingualLexicon
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
RDF Instantiation of the MLM
Lexicon#1Lexicon#2
Lexicon#3 Resources
LexicalObjects
LexicalClasses
LexicalData Categories
Resources
Metadata
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
General Means
W3C standards: Resource Definition Framework (RDF/S) Ontology Web Language (OWL) …
Built on the XML web infrastructure to enable the creation of a Semantic Web web objects are classified according to their properties semantics of relations (links) to other web objects
precisely defined
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MILE Lexical Model
Ideal structure for rendering in RDF: hierarchy of lexical objects built up by combining
atomic data categories via clearly defined relations
Proof of concept: Create an RDF schema for the MILE Lexical
Modelversion 1.2
Instantiate MILE Lexical Data Categories
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
The RDF Schema
Defines classes of objects (MLC) and their relations to other objects
Like a class definition in Java, etc. Classes and properties in the schema
correspond to the E-R model Can specify sub-classes/sub-properties and
inheritance
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MILE Lexical Data Category Registry (MDC)
Instantiation of pre-defined lexical objects Extension of the shared class schema with lexicon-
specific sub-classes and sub-properties Can be used “off the shelf” or as a departure point
for the definition of new or modified categories Enables modular specification of lexical entities
eliminate redundancy identify lexical entries or sub-entries with shared
properties
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MLC in RDF/S features
mlm:LexObject mlm:Valuesmlm:feature
mlm:SemValues
mlm:SynValues
rdfs:subClassOfmlm:semFeature
rdfs:subClassOf
mlm:synFeature
rdfs:subPropertyOf
features are properties of lexical objects
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MLC in RDF/S syntactic features
<rdfs:Property rdf:ID=“synCat"><rdfs:subPropertyOf
rdf:resource="http://webilc.ilc.cnr.it/~lenci/isle/mile-schema-v.1#synFeature"/>
<rdfs:rangerdf:resource=“http://webilc.ilc.cnr.it/~lenci/isle/mile-schema-v.1#SynCatValues”/>
</rdfs:Property>
<rdfs:Class rdf:ID=“SynCatValues”><rdfs:subClassOf
rdf:resource=“http://webilc.ilc.cnr.it/~lenci/isle/mile-schema-v.1 #SynValues”/>
<owl:oneOf rdf:parseType="Collection"><owl:Thing rdf:about="#Noun"/><owl:Thing rdf:about="#Verb"/><owl:Thing rdf:about="#Adjective"/>...
</owl:oneOf> </rdfs:Class> </rdfs:RDF>
feature values
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
MLC in RDF/S semantic features
<rdfs:Property rdf:ID=“domain"><rdfs:subPropertyOf
rdf:resource="http://webilc.ilc.cnr.it/~lenci/isle/mile-schema-v.1#semFeature"/>
<rdfs:rangerdf:resource=“http://webilc.ilc.cnr.it/~lenci/isle/mile-schema-v.1 #DomainValues”/>
</rdfs:Property>
<rdfs:Class rdf:ID=“DomainValues”><rdfs:subClassOf
rdf:resource=“http://webilc.ilc.cnr.it/~lenci/isle/mile-schema-v.1#SemValues”/>
<owl:oneOf rdf:parseType="Collection"><owl:Thing rdf:about="#Finance"/><owl:Thing rdf:about="#Medicine"/><owl:Thing rdf:about="#Sport"/>...
</owl:oneOf> </rdfs:Class> </rdfs:RDF>
“domain ontology”
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Synsets in RDF/S
mlm:Synset rdfs:literalmlm:word
mlm:Synset
mlm:synsetRelation
mlm:Values
rdfs:literalmlm:gloss
mlm:feature
cf. also http://www.semanticweb.org/library/wordnet/wordnet-20000620.rdfs
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
<rdfs:Class rdf:ID="Synset"><rdfs:label>Synset</rdfs:label><rdfs:comment>This class formalizes the notion of synset as defined in WordNet (Fellbaum 1998).</rdfs:comment><rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource=“#LexObject”/>
</rdfs:Class>
<rdfs:Property rdf:ID="synsetRelation"><rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Synset"/><rdfs:range rdf:resource="#Synset"/>
</rdfs:Property>
<rdfs:Property rdf:ID="hypernym" mlm:source="WordNet1.7"><rdfs:comment>The WordNet hypernym relation</rdfs:comment><rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="#synsetRelation"/>
</rdfs:Property><rdfs:Property rdf:ID="meronym" mlm:source="WordNet1.7">
<rdfs:comment>The WordNet meronym relation</rdfs:comment><rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="#synsetRelation"/>
</rdfs:Property>
Synsets in RDF/S
relation between synsets
different types of synset relations
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
<mlm:Synset rdf:about="http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/~wn1.7/concept#01752990“ mlm:source="WordNet1.7">
<mlm:gloss>A member of the genus Canis</mlm:gloss><mlm:word>dog</mlm:word><mlm:word>domestic dog</mlm:word><mlm:word>Canis familiaris</mlm:word><mdc:synCat rdf:resource="#Noun"/><mdc:domain rdf:resource="#Zoology"/><mdc:hypernymrdf:resource="http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/~wn1.7/concept
#01752283"/></mlm:Synset>
WordNet 1.7 Synsets
featureshypernym
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Conclusions and Future Work
The MILE Lexical Model is oriented towards open, distributed lexical resources:
Lexical Information Servers for multiple access to lexical information repositories
Enhance user-adaptivity and resource sharing Develop integration and interchange tools Promote interchange with the Semantic Web and Ontology
communities Related projects and initiatives:
ISO, INTERA, ENABLER, etc.
Bucharest, 30 July 2003
Acknowledgements
S. Atkins, N. Bel, F. Bertagna, P. Bouillon, N. Calzolari, C. Fellbaum, R. Grishman, N. Ide, M. Palmer, W. Peters, G. Thurmair,
M. Villegas, P. Wittenburg, A. Zampolli
and many others …
top related