On different approaches to syntactic analysis into bi-lexical dependencies: An empirical comparison of direct, PCFG-based, and HPSG-based parsers

Angelina Ivanova, University of Oslo,
Stephan Oepen, University of Oslo Potsdam University,
Rebecca Dridan, University of Oslo,
Dan Flickinger, Stanford University,
Lilja Øvrelid, University of Oslo,
Emanuele Lapponi, University of Oslo,


We compare three different approaches to parsing into syntactic, bi- lexical dependencies for English: a ‘direct’ data-driven dependency parser, a statistical phrase structure parser, and a hybrid, ‘deep’ grammar-driven parser. The analyses from the latter two are post- converted to bi-lexical dependencies. Through this ‘reduction’ of all three approaches to syntactic dependency parsers, we determine empirically what performance can be obtained for a common set of de- pendency types for English, across a broad variety of domains. In doing so, we observe what trade-offs apply along three dimensions, accuracy, efficiency, and resilience to domain variation. Our results suggest that the hand-built grammar in one of our parsers helps in both accuracy and cross-domain parsing performance, but these accuracy gains do not necessarily translate to improvements in the downstream task of negation resolution.


Syntactic Dependency Parsing; Domain Variation

Full Text:


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15398/jlm.v4i1.101

ISSN of the paper edition: 2299-856X