Verbmobil Interface Terms (VITs)

  • Michael Schiehlen
  • Johan Bos
  • Michael Dorna
Part of the Artificial Intelligence book series (AI)

Abstract

This article describes the concepts and the contents of Verbmobil Interface Terms (VITs). In VITs all linguistic information of an utterance relevant for translation is represented. They are used to provide an interface representation between several linguistic and dialog components of the Verbmobil system. Information in VITs is encoded in a recordlike data structure. The fields are variable-free lists of non-recursive terms, so-called “flat” set representations. They are filled with semantic, scopal, sortal, morpho-syntactic, prosodic, and discourse information. A labelling system is used to relate different kinds of information to each other. A library package realizing an abstract data type implements construction, access, update, check, print, etc. facilities for VITs.

Keywords

Lution Reso Prefix Prep 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexandersson, J., Auerswald, M., Dorna, M., Finkler, W., Ruland, T., Rupp, C. J., and Schwinn, J. (1997). The Art of Naming Segments. Verbmobil Memo 119, DFKI GmbH, Siemens AG, Universities of Saarbrücken and Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
  2. Backofen, R., Rogers, J., and Vijay-Shanker, K. (1995). A First-Order Axiomatization of the Theory of Finite Trees. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 4(1):5–39.MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Batliner, A., Buckow, J., Niemann, H., Nöth, E., and Warnke, V. The Prosody Module. In this volume. Google Scholar
  4. Block, H., and Ruland, T. Integrated Shallow Linguistic Processing. In this volume. Google Scholar
  5. Bos, J., and Schiehlen, M. (1999). Klassifikation der deutschen Partikeln in Verbmobil. Verbmobil Memo 141, Universität des Saarlandes and Universität Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  6. Bos, J., Gambäck, B., Lieske, C., Mori, Y., Pinkal, M., and Worm, K. L. (1996a). Compositional Semantics in Verbmobil. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. Google Scholar
  7. Bos, J., Schiehlen, M., and Egg, M. (1996b). Definition of the Abstract Semantic Classes for the Verbmobil Forschungsprototyp 1.0. Verbmobil Report 165, Universität des Saarlandes, IBM Deutschland GmbH, and Universität Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
  8. Bos, J. (1995). Predicate Logic Unplugged. In Proceedings of the 10th Amsterdam Colloquium, 133–142. ILLC/Department of Philosophy, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  9. Copestake, A., Flickinger, D., Malouf, R., Riehemann, S., and Sag, I. (1995). Transfer and Minimal Recursion Semantics. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Machine Translation. Google Scholar
  10. Davidson, D. (1967). The Logical Form of Action Sentences. In Rescher, N., ed., The Logic of Decision and Action. Pittsburgh: The University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Dorna, M. (2000). A Library Package for the Verbmobil Interface Term. Verbmobil Report 238, Institut für maschinelle Sprachverarbeitung, Universität Stuttgart, Germany.Google Scholar
  12. Dowty, D. R. (1989). On the Semantic Content of the Notion of “Thematic Role”. In Chierchia, G., Partee, B. H., and Turner, R., eds., Properties, Types and Meaning, Volume II: Semantic Issues. Kluwer Academic Publishers. 69–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Emele, M., Dorna, M., Lüdeling, A., Zinsmeister, H., and Rohrer, C. Semantic-Based Transfer. In this volume. Google Scholar
  14. Haiber, U., Mangold, H., Regel-Brietzmann, P., Ruske, G., and Schleß, V. Robust Recognition of Spontaneous Speech. In this volume. Google Scholar
  15. Heine, J., and Bos, J. Discourse and Dialogue Semantics for Translation. In this volume. Google Scholar
  16. Kamp, H., and Reyle, U. (1993). From Discourse to Logic: An Introduction to Modeltheoretic Semantics of Natural Language. Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Kaplan, R. M., and Bresnan, J. (1982). Lexical-Functional Grammar: A Formal System for Grammatical Representation. In Bresnan, J., ed., The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 173–281.Google Scholar
  18. Kasper, W., Bos, J., Schiehlen, M., and Thielen, C. (1997). Definition of Abstract Semantic Classes. Technical report, DFKI GmbH, Saarbrücken, Germany.Google Scholar
  19. Koch, S., Küssner, U., and Stede, M. Contextual Disambiguation. In this volume. Google Scholar
  20. Reyle, U. (1993). Dealing with Ambiguities by Underspecification: Construction, Representation and Deduction. Journal of Semantics 10(2):123–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rupp, C.J., and Worm, K. (1999). VITs for Partial and Elliptic Structures. Verbmobil Memo 142, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany.Google Scholar
  22. Rupp, C., Spilker, J., and Klarner, M. Combining Analyses from Various Parsers. In this volume. Google Scholar
  23. Schiehlen, M. (1999). Semantikkonstruktion, volume 5 of Arbeitspapiere des IMS (AIMS). IMS, Universität Stuttgart, Germany. Doctoral thesis.Google Scholar
  24. Schiehlen, M. Semantic Construction. In this volume. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Schiehlen
    • 1
  • Johan Bos
    • 2
  • Michael Dorna
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Natural Language Processing (IMS)Universität StuttgartGermany
  2. 2.Department of Computational LinguisticsUniversität des SaarlandesSaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations