pos tagging and chunking for indian languages rajeev sangal and v. sriram, international institute...

POS tagging and Chunking for Indian Languages

Rajeev Sangal and V. Sriram, International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad

Contents

NLP : Introduction Language Analysis - Representation

Part-of-speech tags in Indian Languages (Ex. Hindi) Corpus based methods: An introduction POS tagging using HMMs

Introduction to TnT

Chunking for Indian languages – Few experiments

Shared task - Introduction

Language

A unique ability of humans Animals have signs – Sign for danger

But cannot combine the signs

Higher animals – Apes Can combine symbols (noun & verb)

But can talk only about here and now

Language : Means of Communication

CONCEPT CONCEPT

Language

coding decoding

* The concept gets transferred through language

Language : Means of thinking

What should I wear today?

* Can we think without language ?

What is NLP ?

The process of computer analysis of input provided in a human language is known as Natural Language Processing.

Concept

Language

Intermediate representationUsed for processing by computer

Applications

Machine translation

Document Clustering

Information Extraction / Retrieval

Text classification

MT system : Shakti

• Machine translation system being developed at

IIIT – Hyderabad.

• A hybrid translation system which uses the combined

strengths of Linguistic, Statistical and Machine learning

techniques.

• Integrates the best available NLP technologies.

Shakti architecture

English sentence

English sentence analysis

Transfer from English to Hindi

Hindi sentence generation

Hindi sentence

MorphologyPOS tagging

ChunkingParsing

Word reorderingHindi word subs.

AgreementWord-generation

Contents



Introduction to TnT



Levels of Language Analysis

• Morphological analysis

• Lexical Analysis ( POS tagging )

• Syntactic Analysis ( Chunking, Parsing )

• Semantic Analysis ( Word sense disambiguation )

• Discourse processing ( Anaphora resolution )

Let’s take an example sentence

“Children are watching some programmes on television in the house”

Chunking

What are chunks ?

[[ Children ]] (( are watching )) [[ some programmes ]] [[ on television ]] [[ in the house ]]

Chunks Noun chunks (NP, PP) in square brackets Verb chunks (VG) in parentheses

Chunks represent objects Noun chunks represent objects/concepts Verb chunks represent actions

Chunking

Representation in SSF

Part-of-Speech tagging

Morphological analysis

Deals with the word form and it’s analysis.

Analysis consists of characteristic properties like Root/Stem Lexical category Gender, number, person … Etc …

Ex: watching Root = watch Lexical category = verb Etc …

Morphological analysis

Contents


Part-of-speech tags in Indian Languages (Ex. Hindi)

Corpus based methods: An introduction POS tagging using HMMs

Introduction to TnT



POS Tags in Hindi

POS Tags in Hindi

Broadly categories are noun, verb, adjective & adverb.

Word are classified depending on their role, both individually as well as in the sentence.

Example:

vaha aama khaa rahaa hei

Pron noun verb verb verb

POS Tagging

Simplest method of POS tagging

Looking in the dictionary

khaanaa

Dictionary lookup

verb

Problems with POS Tagging

Size of the dictionary limits the scope of POS-tagger.

Ambiguity The same word can be used both as a noun as well as

a verb.khaanaa

noun verb


Ambiguity Sentences in which the word “khaanaa” occurs

tum bahuta achhaa khaanaa banatii ho. mein jilebii khaanaa chaahataa hun.

Hence, complete sentence has to be looked at before

determining it’s role and thus the POS tag.


Many applications need more specific POS tags.

For example,

Hence, the need for defining a tagset.

… seba khaa rahaa … Verb Finite Main

… khaate huE … Verb Non-Finite Adjective

… khaakara … Verb Non-Finite Adverb

sharaaba piinaa sehata …

Verb Non-Finite Nominal

Defining the tagset for Hindi (IIIT Tagset)

Issues !

1. Fineness V/s Coarseness in linguistic analysis

2. Syntactic Function V/s lexical category

3. New tags V/s tags from a standard tagger

Fineness V/s Coarseness

Decision has to be taken whether tags will account for finer distinctions of various features of the parts of speech.

Need to strike a balance

Not too fine to hamper machine learning Not too coarse to loose information

Fineness V/s Coarseness

Nouns Plurality information not taken into account

(noun singular and noun plural are marked with same tags). Case information not marked

(noun direct and noun oblique are marked with same tags).

Adjectives and Adverbs No distinction between comparitive and superlative forms

Verbs Finer distinctions are made (eg., VJJ, VRB, VNN) Helps us understand the arguments that a verb form can take.

Fineness in Verb tags Useful for tasks like dependency parsing as we have

better information about arguments of verb form.

Non-finite form of verbs which are used as nouns or adjectives or adverbs still retain their verbal property.

(VNN -> Noun formed for a verb)

Example:

aasamaana/NN mein/PREP udhane/VNN vaalaa/PREP ghodhaa/NN

“sky” “in” “flying” “horse”

niiche/NLOC utara/VFM aayaa/VAUX

“down” “climb” “came”

Syntactic V/S Lexical

Whether to tag the word based on lexical or syntactic category.

Should “uttar” in “uttar bhaarata” be tagged as noun oradjective ?

Lexical category is given more importance than syntactic category while marking text manually.

Leads to consistency in tagging.

New tags v/s tags from standard tagset

Entirely new tagset for Indian languages not desirable as people are familiar with standard tagsets like Penn tags.

Penn tagset has been used as benchmark while deciding tags for Hindi.

Wherever Penn tagset has been found inadequate, new tags introduced.

NVB New tag for kriyamuls or Light verbs QW Modified tag for question words

IIIT Tagset

Tags are grouped into three types.

1. Group1 : Adopted from the Penn tagset with minor changes.

2. Group2 : Modification over Penn tagset.3. Group3 : Tags not present in Penn tagset.

Examples of tags in Group3

1. INTF ( Intensifier ) : Words like ‘baHuta’, ‘kama’ etc.

2. NVB, JVB, RBVB : Light verbs.

Detailed guidelines would be put online.

Contents



Introduction to TnT



Corpus – based approach

POS tagged corpus Learn POS tagger

Untagged new corpus

Tagged new corpus

POS tagging : A simple method

• Pick the most likely tag for each word

• Probabilities can be estimated from a tagged corpus.

• Assumes independence between tags.

• Accuracy < 90%

POS tagging : A simple method

Example

• Brown corpus, 182159 tagged words (training section), 26 tags

• Example :

• mujhe xo kitabein xijiye •Word xo occurs 267 times,

• 227 times tagged as QFN• 29 times as VAUX

• P(QFN|W=xo) = 227/267 = 0.8502• P(NN | W=xo) = 29/267 = 0.1086

Corpus-based approaches

Learning Rules Statistical Transformation-based error driven learning.

Brill - 1995

Hidden Markov models.

TnT, Brants 00

Inductive Logic programming.

Cussens - 1997

Maximum entropy. Ratnaparakhi’ 96

Contents



Introduction to TnT



POS tagging using HMMs

Let W be a sequence of words

W = w1 , w2 … wn

Let T be the corresponding tag sequence

T = t1 , t2 … tn

Task : Find T which maximizes P ( T | W )

T’ = argmaxT P ( T | W )


If we use Tri-gram model instead for the tag sequence,

P ( T ) = P ( t1 ) * P ( t2 | t1 ) * P ( t3 | t1 t2 ) …… * P ( tn | tn-2 tn-1 )

Which model to choose ?

• Depends on the amount of data available !

• Richer models ( Tri-grams, 4-grams ) require lots of data.

Chain rule with approximations: Example

• P (vaha | det ) = ( Number of times ‘vaha’ appeared as ‘det’ in the corpus ) ------------------------------------------------------------- ( Total number of occurrences of ‘det’ in the corpus )

• P ( verb | noun ) = ( Number of times ‘verb’ followed ‘noun’ in the corpus ) ------------------------------------------------------------- ( Total number of occurrences of ‘noun’ in the corpus )

If we obtained the following estimates from the corpus

det noun verb

vaha ladakaa gayaa

0.5

0.4

0.99

0.5

0.4

0.02

P ( W , T ) = 0.5 * 0.4 * 0.99 * 0.5 * 0.4 * 0.02 = 0.000792


We need to estimate three types of parameters from the corpus

Pstart(ti) = (no. of sentences which begin with ti ) / ( no. of sentences )

P ( ti | ti-1 ) = count ( ti-1 ti ) / count ( ti-1 )

P ( wi | ti ) = count ( wi with ti ) / count ( ti )

These parameters can be directly represented using the HiddenMarkov Models (HMMs) and the best tag sequence can be

computed by applying Viterbi algorithm on the HMMs.

Markov models

Markov Chain

• An event is dependent on the previous events.

Consider the word sequence

usane kahaa ki

Here, each word is dependent on the previous one word. Hence, it is said to form markov chain of order 1.

Hidden Markov models

Hidden states follow markov property. Hence, this model is know as Hidden Markov Model.

Observation sequence O o1 o2 o3 o4

x1 x2 x3 x4Hidden states sequence X

Index of sequence t 1 2 3 4

Hidden Markov models

• Representation of parameters in HMMs

• Define O(t) = tth Observation

• Define X(t) = Hidden State Value at tth position

A = aab = P ( X ( t+1 ) = Xb | X ( t ) = Xa ) Transition matrix

B = bak = P ( O ( t ) = Ok | X ( t ) = Xa ) Emission matrix

PI = pia = Probability of the starting with hidden state Xa PI matrixThe model is μ = { A , PI , B }

HMM for POS tagging

Observation sequence === Word sequence

Hidden state sequence === Tag sequence

Model

A = P ( current tag | previous tag )

B = P ( current word | current tag )

PI = Pstart ( tag )

Tag sequences are mapped to Hidden state sequences because they are not observable in the natural language text.

Example

A =

det noun

verb

det .01 .99 .00

noun

.30 .30 .40

verb .40 .40 .20

vaha ladakaa

gayaa

det .40 .00 .00

noun .00 .015 .0031

verb .00 .0004 .020

B =

PI =

det 0.5

noun

0.4

verb .01


The problem can be formulated as,

Given the observation sequence O and the model

μ = (A, B, PI), how to choose the best state sequence X which explains the observations ?

• Consider all the possible tag sequences and choose the tag sequence having the maximum joint probability with the observation sequence.

• X_max = argmax ( P(O , X) ) • The complexity of the above is high. Order NT

• Viterbi algorithm is used for computational efficiency.


det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

27 tag sequences possible ! = 27 paths

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

Let αnoun(ladakaa) represent the probability of reaching the state‘noun’ taking the best possible path and generating observation ‘ladakaa’

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

Best probability of reaching a state associated with first word

αpron(vaha) = PI (det) * B [det, vaha ]

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

Probability of reaching a state elsewhere in the best possible way

αnoun(ladakaa) =

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Probability of reaching a state in the best possible way

αnoun(ladakaa) = MAX { αpron(vaha) * A [det, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] ,

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Probability of reaching a state in the best possible way,

αnoun(ladakaa) = MAX { αpron(vaha) * A [ det, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] , αnoun(vaha) * A [ noun, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] ,

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Probability of reaching a state in the best possible way

αnoun(ladakaa) = MAX { αpron(vaha) * A [det, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] , αnoun(vaha) * A [ noun, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] ,

αverb(vaha) * A [ verb, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] }

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

What is the best way to come to a particular state ?

phinoun(ladakaa) = ARGMAX { αpron(vaha) * A [ pron, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] , αnoun(vaha) * A [ noun, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] ,

αverb(vaha) * A [ verb, noun ] * B [ noun, ladakaa ] }

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

The last tag of the most likely sequence

phi (T+1) = ARGMAX { αpron(hansaa) , αnoun(hansaa) , αverb(hansaa) }

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Viterbi algorithm

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

det

noun

verb

vaha ladakaa hansaa

Most likely sequence is obtained by backtracking.

t 1 2 3

O

X’s

Preliminary Results POS tagging for Indian languages

Training set = 182159 tokens, Testing set = 14277 tokens

Tags = 26.

Most frequent tag labelling = 78.85 %

Hidden Markov Models = 86.75 %

Needs improvement!

By experimenting with a variety of tags and tokens ( Some experiments on the chunking task are shown in following slides ).

Preliminary Results

Most Common error seen.

NNP, NNC NN

<* see the output of the system >

Opportunity to carry out experiments to eliminate such errors as part of NLPAI shared task , 2006 (will be introduced at the end).

Contents



Introduction to TnT



Introduction to TnT

Efficient implementation of Viterbi’s algorithm for 2nd order Markov Chains ( Trigram approximation ).

Language independent – Can be trained on any corpus.

Easy to use.

Introduction to TnT 4 main programs –

tnt-para – trains the model (parameter generation) tnt-para [options] <corpus_file>

tnt – tagging tnt [options] <model> <corpus>

tnt-diff - Comparing two files to get precision/ recall figures. tnt-diff [options] <original file 1> <new output file>

tnt-wc – count tokens (words) and types (pos-tag/chunk-tag) in different files. tnt-wc [options] <corpusfile>

Introduction to TnT Training file format

Tokens and tag separated by white space.

Example,

%% <comment> nirAlA NNP kI PREP sAhiwya NN

%% blank line – new sentence yahAz PRP yaha PRP aXikAMRa JJ

Introduction to TnT

Testing file – consists of only the first column.

Other files – Used to store the model .lex file .123 file .map file

Demo1.

Contents



Introduction to TnT



An Example (Chunk boundary identification)

Chunking with TnT

Chunk Tags STRT: A chunk starts at this token CNT: This token lies in the middle of a chunk STP: This token lies at the end of a chunk STRT_STP: This token lies in a chunk of its own

Chunk Tag Schemes 2-tag Scheme: {STRT, CNT} 3-tag Scheme: {STRT, CNT, STP} 4-tag Scheme: {STRT, CNT, STP, STRT_STP}

Input Tokens

What kinds of input tokens can we use?

Word only – simplest

POS tag only – use only the part of speech tag of the word

Combinations of the above – Word_POStag: word followed by POS tag POStag_Word: POS tag followed by word.

Chunking with TnT: Experiments

Training corpus = 150000 tokens Testing corpus = 20000 tokens

Trick to improve learning is by training on larger tagset and reduce it to smaller tagset NO LOSS of INFO. as all the tagsets convey same info.

Best results (Precision = 85.6%) obtained for Input Tokens of the form ‘Word_POS’ Learning trick : 4 tags reduced to 2

Chunking with TnT: Improvement

85.6 not good enough. Improvement of model (Precision = 88.63%) by

adding contextual information (POS tags). Example,

Chunking with TnT: Improvements

For experiments which lead to furthur improvements in chunk boundary identification, see

Akshay Singh; Sushama Bendre; Rajeev Sangal, HMM based Chunker for Hindi, In Second International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing: Companion Volume including Posters/Demos and tutorial abstracts.

Chunking labelling & Results

Chunk labelling: Chunks which have been identified have to be labelled as Noun chunks, Verb chunks etc.

Rule based chunk labelling performed best.

RESULTS:

Final Chunk Boundary Identification accuracy = 92.6%

Chunk boundary identification + Chunk labelling = 91.5%

Contents



Introduction to TnT



Shared task.

For information on the shared task, refer to the flyer on NLPAI shared task 2006.

Thank you

pos tagging and chunking for indian languages rajeev sangal and v. sriram, international institute...

Documents