In this paper, we present the SzegedAI team’s submissions to the ArchEHR-QA 2025 shared task. Our approaches include multiple prompting techniques for large language models (LLMs), sentence similarity methods, and traditional feature engineering. We are aiming to explore both modern and traditional solutions to the task. To combine the strengths of these diverse methods, we employed different ensembling strategies.

Within the research presented in this article, we created a new question answering benchmark database for Hungarian called MILQA. When creating the dataset, we basically followed the principles of the English SQuAD 2.0, however, like in some more recent English question answering datasets, we introduced a number of innovations beyond SQuAD: e.g., yes/no-questions, list-like answers consisting of several text spans, long answers, questions requiring calculation and other question types where you cannot simply copy the answer from the text. For all these non-extractive question types, the pragmatically adequate form of the answer was also added to make the training of generative models possible. We implemented and evaluated a set of baseline retrieval and answer span extraction models on the dataset. BM25 performed better than any vector-based solution for retrieval. Cross-lingual transfer from English significantly improved span extraction models.

In this paper, we present how the principles of universal dependencies and morphology have been adapted to Hungarian. We report the most challenging grammatical phenomena and our solutions to those. On the basis of the adapted guidelines, we have converted and manually corrected 1,800 sentences from the Szeged Treebank to universal dependency format. We also introduce experiments on this manually annotated corpus for evaluating automatic conversion and the added value of language-specific, i.e. non-universal, annotations. Our results reveal that converting to universal dependencies is not necessarily trivial, moreover, using language-specific morphological features may have an impact on overall performance.

The Szeged Corpus is the largest manually annotated database containing the possible morphological analyses and lemmas for each word form. In this work, we present its latest version, Szeged Corpus 2.5, in which the new harmonized morphological coding system of Hungarian has been employed and, on the other hand, the majority of misspelled words have been corrected and tagged with the proper morphological code. New morphological codes are introduced for participles, causative / modal / frequentative verbs, adverbial pronouns and punctuation marks, moreover, the distinction between common and proper nouns is eliminated. We also report some statistical data on the frequency of the new morphological codes. The new version of the corpus made it possible to train magyarlanc, a data-driven POS-tagger of Hungarian on a dataset with the new harmonized codes. According to the results, magyarlanc is able to achieve a state-of-the-art accuracy score on the 2.5 version as well.

Joint morphological and syntactic analysis has been proposed as a way of improving parsing accuracy for richly inflected languages. Starting from a transition-based model for joint part-of-speech tagging and dependency parsing, we explore different ways of integrating morphological features into the model. We also investigate the use of rule-based morphological analyzers to provide hard or soft lexical constraints and the use of word clusters to tackle the sparsity of lexical features. Evaluation on five morphologically rich languages (Czech, Finnish, German, Hungarian, and Russian) shows consistent improvements in both morphological and syntactic accuracy for joint prediction over a pipeline model, with further improvements thanks to lexical constraints and word clusters. The final results improve the state of the art in dependency parsing for all languages.

To create the first Hungarian WSD corpus, 39 suitable word form samples were selected for the purpose of word sense disambiguation. Among others, selection criteria required the given word form to be frequent in Hungarian language usage, and to have more than one sense considered frequent in usage. HNC and its Heti Világgazdaság subcorpus provided the basis for corpus text selection. This way, each sample has a relevant context (whole article), and information on the lemma, POS-tagging and automatic tokenization is also available. When planning the corpus, 300-500 samples of each word form were to be annotated. This size makes it possible that the subcorpora prepared for the individual word forms can be compared to data available for other languages. However, the finalized database also contains unannotated samples and samples with single annotation, which were annotated only by one of the linguists. The corpus follows the ACL’s SensEval/SemEval WSD tasks format. The first version of the corpus was developed within the scope of the project titled The construction Hungarian WordNet Ontology and its application in Information Extraction Systems (Hatvani et al., 2007). The corpus “ for research and educational purposes” is available and can be downloaded free of charge.

A highly accurate Named Entity (NE) corpus for Hungarian that is publicly available for research purposes is introduced in the paper, along with its main properties. The results of experiments that apply various Machine Learning models and classifier combination schemes are also presented to serve as a benchmark for further research based on the corpus. The data is a segment of the Szeged Corpus (Csendes et al., 2004), consisting of short business news articles collected from MTI (Hungarian News Agency, www.mti.hu). The annotation procedure was carried out paying special attention to annotation accuracy. The corpus went through a parallel annotation phase done by two annotators, resulting in a tagging with inter-annotator agreement rate of 99.89%. Controversial taggings were collected and discussed by the two annotators and a linguist with several years of experience in corpus annotation. These examples were tagged following the decision they made together, and finally all entities that had suspicious or dubious annotations were collected and checked for consistency. We consider the result of this correcting process virtually be free of errors. Our best performing Named Entity Recognizer (NER) model attained an accuracy of 92.86% F measure on the corpus.