<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="recasens-etal-2012-annotating">
    <titleInfo>
        <title>Annotating Near-Identity from Coreference Disagreements</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <name type="personal">
        <namePart type="given">Marta</namePart>
        <namePart type="family">Recasens</namePart>
        <role>
            <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
        </role>
    </name>
    <name type="personal">
        <namePart type="given">M</namePart>
        <namePart type="given">Antònia</namePart>
        <namePart type="family">Martí</namePart>
        <role>
            <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
        </role>
    </name>
    <name type="personal">
        <namePart type="given">Constantin</namePart>
        <namePart type="family">Orasan</namePart>
        <role>
            <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
        </role>
    </name>
    <originInfo>
        <dateIssued>2012-may</dateIssued>
    </originInfo>
    <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
    <relatedItem type="host">
        <titleInfo>
            <title>Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12)</title>
        </titleInfo>
        <originInfo>
            <publisher>European Language Resources Association (ELRA)</publisher>
            <place>
                <placeTerm type="text">Istanbul, Turkey</placeTerm>
            </place>
        </originInfo>
        <genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
    </relatedItem>
    <abstract>We present an extension of the coreference annotation in the English NP4E and the Catalan AnCora-CA corpora with near-identity relations, which are borderline cases of coreference. The annotated subcorpora have 50K tokens each. Near-identity relations, as presented by Recasens et al. (2010; 2011), build upon the idea that identity is a continuum rather than an either/or relation, thus introducing a middle ground category to explain currently problematic cases. The first annotation effort that we describe shows that it is not possible to annotate near-identity explicitly because subjects are not fully aware of it. Therefore, our second annotation effort used an indirect method, and arrived at near-identity annotations by inference from the disagreements between five annotators who had only a two-alternative choice between coreference and non-coreference. The results show that whereas as little as 2-6% of the relations were explicitly annotated as near-identity in the former effort, up to 12-16% of the relations turned out to be near-identical following the indirect method of the latter effort.</abstract>
    <identifier type="citekey">recasens-etal-2012-annotating</identifier>
    <location>
        <url>http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/674_Paper.pdf</url>
    </location>
    <part>
        <date>2012-may</date>
        <extent unit="page">
            <start>165</start>
            <end>172</end>
        </extent>
    </part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>

%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Annotating Near-Identity from Coreference Disagreements
%A Recasens, Marta
%A Martí, M. Antònia
%A Orasan, Constantin
%S Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12)
%D 2012
%8 may
%I European Language Resources Association (ELRA)
%C Istanbul, Turkey
%F recasens-etal-2012-annotating
%X We present an extension of the coreference annotation in the English NP4E and the Catalan AnCora-CA corpora with near-identity relations, which are borderline cases of coreference. The annotated subcorpora have 50K tokens each. Near-identity relations, as presented by Recasens et al. (2010; 2011), build upon the idea that identity is a continuum rather than an either/or relation, thus introducing a middle ground category to explain currently problematic cases. The first annotation effort that we describe shows that it is not possible to annotate near-identity explicitly because subjects are not fully aware of it. Therefore, our second annotation effort used an indirect method, and arrived at near-identity annotations by inference from the disagreements between five annotators who had only a two-alternative choice between coreference and non-coreference. The results show that whereas as little as 2-6% of the relations were explicitly annotated as near-identity in the former effort, up to 12-16% of the relations turned out to be near-identical following the indirect method of the latter effort.
%U http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/674_Paper.pdf
%P 165-172

Markdown (Informal)

[Annotating Near-Identity from Coreference Disagreements](http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/674_Paper.pdf) (Recasens et al., LREC 2012)

• Annotating Near-Identity from Coreference Disagreements (Recasens et al., LREC 2012)

ACL

• Marta Recasens, M. Antònia Martí, and Constantin Orasan. 2012. Annotating Near-Identity from Coreference Disagreements. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'12), pages 165–172, Istanbul, Turkey. European Language Resources Association (ELRA).