We propose a method for evaluating the quality of generated text by asking evaluators to count facts, and computing precision, recall, f-score, and accuracy from the raw counts. We believe this approach leads to a more objective and easier to reproduce evaluation. We apply this to the task of medical report summarisation, where measuring objective quality and accuracy is of paramount importance.

Automatic summarisation has the potential to aid physicians in streamlining clerical tasks such as note taking. But it is notoriously difficult to evaluate these systems and demonstrate that they are safe to be used in a clinical setting. To circumvent this issue, we propose a semi-automatic approach whereby physicians post-edit generated notes before submitting them. We conduct a preliminary study on the time saving of automatically generated consultation notes with post-editing. Our evaluators are asked to listen to mock consultations and to post-edit three generated notes. We time this and find that it is faster than writing the note from scratch. We present insights and lessons learnt from this experiment.

Word embedding-based similarity measures are currently among the top-performing methods on unsupervised semantic textual similarity (STS) tasks. Recent work has increasingly adopted a statistical view on these embeddings, with some of the top approaches being essentially various correlations (which include the famous cosine similarity). Another excellent candidate for a similarity measure is mutual information (MI), which can capture arbitrary dependencies between the variables and has a simple and intuitive expression. Unfortunately, its use in the context of dense word embeddings has so far been avoided due to difficulties with estimating MI for continuous data. In this work we go through a vast literature on estimating MI in such cases and single out the most promising methods, yielding a simple and elegant similarity measure for word embeddings. We show that mutual information is a viable alternative to correlations, gives an excellent signal that correlates well with human judgements of similarity and rivals existing state-of-the-art unsupervised methods.

A large body of research into semantic textual similarity has focused on constructing state-of-the-art embeddings using sophisticated modelling, careful choice of learning signals and many clever tricks. By contrast, little attention has been devoted to similarity measures between these embeddings, with cosine similarity being used unquestionably in the majority of cases. In this work, we illustrate that for all common word vectors, cosine similarity is essentially equivalent to the Pearson correlation coefficient, which provides some justification for its use. We thoroughly characterise cases where Pearson correlation (and thus cosine similarity) is unfit as similarity measure. Importantly, we show that Pearson correlation is appropriate for some word vectors but not others. When it is not appropriate, we illustrate how common non-parametric rank correlation coefficients can be used instead to significantly improve performance. We support our analysis with a series of evaluations on word-level and sentence-level semantic textual similarity benchmarks. On the latter, we show that even the simplest averaged word vectors compared by rank correlation easily rival the strongest deep representations compared by cosine similarity.

Similarity measures based purely on word embeddings are comfortably competing with much more sophisticated deep learning and expert-engineered systems on unsupervised semantic textual similarity (STS) tasks. In contrast to commonly used geometric approaches, we treat a single word embedding as e.g. 300 observations from a scalar random variable. Using this paradigm, we first illustrate that similarities derived from elementary pooling operations and classic correlation coefficients yield excellent results on standard STS benchmarks, outperforming many recently proposed methods while being much faster and trivial to implement. Next, we demonstrate how to avoid pooling operations altogether and compare sets of word embeddings directly via correlation operators between reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces. Just like cosine similarity is used to compare individual word vectors, we introduce a novel application of the centered kernel alignment (CKA) as a natural generalisation of squared cosine similarity for sets of word vectors. Likewise, CKA is very easy to implement and enjoys very strong empirical results.

This paper presents a linguistic processing pipeline for Bulgarian including morphological analysis, lemmatization and syntactic analysis of Bulgarian texts. The morphological analysis is performed by three modules ― two statistical-based and one rule-based. The combination of these modules achieves the best result for morphological tagging of Bulgarian over a rich tagset (680 tags). The lemmatization is based on rules, generated from a large morphological lexicon of Bulgarian. The syntactic analysis is implemented via MaltParser. The two statistical morphological taggers and MaltParser are trained on datasets constructed within BulTreeBank project. The processing pipeline includes also a sentence splitter and a tokenizer. All tools in the pipeline are packed in modules that can also perform separately. The whole pipeline is designed to be able to serve as a back-end of a web service oriented interface, but it also supports the user tasks with a command-line interface. The processing pipeline is compatible with the Text Corpus Format, which allows it to delegate the management of the components to the WebLicht platform.

Our goal is to provide a web-based platform for the long-term preservation and distribution of a heterogeneous collection of linguistic resources. We discuss the corpus preprocessing and normalisation phase that results in sets of multi-rooted trees. At the same time we transform the original metadata records, just like the corpora annotated using different annotation approaches and exhibiting different levels of granularity, into the all-encompassing and highly flexible format eTEI for which we present editing and parsing tools. We also discuss the architecture of the sustainability platform. Its primary components are an XML database that contains corpus and metadata files and an SQL database that contains user accounts and access control lists. A staging area, whose structure, contents, and consistency can be checked using tools, is used to make sure that new resources about to be imported into the platform have the correct structure.