@inproceedings{mojica-de-la-vega-ng-2016-markov,
    title = "{M}arkov {L}ogic {N}etworks for Text Mining: A Qualitative and Empirical Comparison with Integer Linear Programming",
    author = "Mojica de la Vega, Luis Gerardo  and
      Ng, Vincent",
    editor = "Calzolari, Nicoletta  and
      Choukri, Khalid  and
      Declerck, Thierry  and
      Goggi, Sara  and
      Grobelnik, Marko  and
      Maegaard, Bente  and
      Mariani, Joseph  and
      Mazo, Helene  and
      Moreno, Asuncion  and
      Odijk, Jan  and
      Piperidis, Stelios",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation ({LREC}`16)",
    month = may,
    year = "2016",
    address = "Portoro{\v{z}}, Slovenia",
    publisher = "European Language Resources Association (ELRA)",
    url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/jlcl-multiple-ingestion/L16-1695/",
    pages = "4388--4395",
    abstract = "Joint inference approaches such as Integer Linear Programming (ILP) and Markov Logic Networks (MLNs) have recently been successfully applied to many natural language processing (NLP) tasks, often outperforming their pipeline counterparts. However, MLNs are arguably much less popular among NLP researchers than ILP. While NLP researchers who desire to employ these joint inference frameworks do not necessarily have to understand their theoretical underpinnings, it is imperative that they understand which of them should be applied under what circumstances. With the goal of helping NLP researchers better understand the relative strengths and weaknesses of MLNs and ILP; we will compare them along different dimensions of interest, such as expressiveness, ease of use, scalability, and performance. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic comparison of ILP and MLNs on an NLP task."
}