Morphology-Based Segmentation Combination for Arabic Mention Detection

Abstract

The Arabic language has a very rich/complex morphology. Each Arabic word is composed of zero or more prefixes, one stem and zero or more suffixes. Consequently, the Arabic data is sparse compared to other languages such as English, and it is necessary to conduct word segmentation before any natural language processing task. Therefore, the word-segmentation step is worth a deeper study since it is a preprocessing step which shall have a significant impact on all the steps coming afterward. In this article, we present an Arabic mention detection system that has very competitive results in the recent Automatic Content Extraction (ACE) evaluation campaign. We investigate the impact of different segmentation schemes on Arabic mention detection systems and we show how these systems may benefit from more than one segmentation scheme. We report the performance of several mention detection models using different kinds of possible and known segmentation schemes for Arabic text: punctuation separation, Arabic Treebank, and morphological and character-level segmentations. We show that the combination of competitive segmentation styles leads to a better performance. Results indicate a statistically significant improvement when Arabic Treebank and morphological segmentations are combined.

References

1. Benajiba, Y., Diab, M., and Rosso, P. 2008. Arabic named entity recognition using optimized feature sets. In Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP’08).
2. Berger, A., Della Pietra, S., and Della Pietra, V. 1996. A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing. Comput. Linguist. 22, 1, 39--71.
3. Chen, S. and Rosenfeld, R. 2000. A survey of smoothing techniques for ME models. IEEE Trans. Speech Audio Proc.
4. Chen, S. F. and Goodman, J. 1998. An empirical study of smoothing techniques for language modeling. Tech. rep., TR-10-98, Center for Research in Computing Technology, Harvard University.
5. Diab, M., Hacioglu, K., and Jurafsky, D. 2004. Automatic tagging of Arabic text: From raw text to base phrase chunks. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference/North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT/NAACL’04).
6. Florian, R., Hassan, H., Ittycheriah, A., Jing, H., Kambhatla, N., Luo, X., Nicolov, N., and Roukos, S. 2004. A statistical model for multilingual entity detection and tracking. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference/North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT/NAACL’04).
7. Goodman, J. 2002. Sequential conditional generalized iterative scaling. In Proceedings of the Association of Computer Linguistics (ACL’02).
8. Graff, D. 2003. Arabic gigaword. http://www.ldc.upenn.edu/.
9. Habash, N. and Sadat, F. 2006. Combination of Arabic preprocessing schemes for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the Association of Computer Linguistics (ACL’06).
10. Jing, H., Florian, R., Luo, X., Zhang, T., and Ittycheriah, A. 2003. How to get a Chinese Name (Entity): Segmentation and combination issues. In Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP’03).
11. Lafferty, J., McCallum, A., and Pereira, F. 2001. Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML’01).
12. Lee, Y.-S., Papineni, K., Roukos, S., Emam, O., and Hassan, H. 2003. Language model based Arabic word segmentation. In Proceedings of the Association of Computer Linguistics (ACL’03). 399--406.
13. Maamouri, M., Bies, A., Buckwalter, T., and Mekki, W. 2004. The Penn Arabic Treebank: Building a large-scale annotated Arabic corpus. In Proceedings of the NEMLAR Conference on Arabic Language Resources and Tools (NEMLAR’04).
14. Mohri, M., Pereira, F. C. N., and Riley, M. 1998. A rational design for a weighted finite-state transducer library. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Implementation and Application of Automata (CIAA’98). D. Wood and S. Yu, Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1436. Springer-Verlag: Berlin. 144--158.
15. NIST. 2007. The ACE evaluation plan. www.nist.gov/speech/tests/ace/index.htm.
16. Noreen, E. W. 1989. Computer-Intensive Methods for Testing Hypotheses. John Wiley & Sons.
17. Ramshaw, L. and Marcus, M. 1994. Exploring the statistical derivation of transformational rule sequences for part-of-speech tagging. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Combining Symbolic and Statistical Approaches to Language (ACL’94). 128--135.
18. Ramshaw, L. and Marcus, M. 1995. Text chunking using transformation-based learning. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Very Large Corpora (WVLC’95). D. Yarowsky and K. Church, Eds. Association for Computational Linguistics, 82--94.
19. Tjong Kim Sang, E. F. 2002. Introduction to the CONLL-2002 shared task: Language-independent named entity recognition. In Proceedings of the Conference on Natural Language Learning (CoNLL’02). 155--158.
20. Tjong Kim Sang, E. F. and Veenstra, J. 1999. Representing text chunks. In Proceedings of the Conference on the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL’99).
21. Toutanova, K., Klein, D., Manning, C., and Singer, Y. 2003. Feature-rich part-of-speech tagging with a cyclic dependency network. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference/North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT/NAACL’03).
22. Zitouni, I., Sorensen, J., Luo, X., and Florian, R. 2005. The impact of morphological stemming on Arabic mention detection and conference resolution. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Computing Approaches to Semitic Languages (CASL’05).