Snowball: extracting relations from large plain-text collections
DL '00 Proceedings of the fifth ACM conference on Digital libraries
Extracting Patterns and Relations from the World Wide Web
WebDB '98 Selected papers from the International Workshop on The World Wide Web and Databases
Discovering relations among named entities from large corpora
ACL '04 Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
Espresso: leveraging generic patterns for automatically harvesting semantic relations
ACL-44 Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and the 44th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics
A shortest path dependency kernel for relation extraction
HLT '05 Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing
Preemptive information extraction using unrestricted relation discovery
HLT-NAACL '06 Proceedings of the main conference on Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics
Methods for domain-independent information extraction from the web: an experimental comparison
AAAI'04 Proceedings of the 19th national conference on Artifical intelligence
Exploiting rich syntactic information for relation extraction from biomedical articles
NAACL-Short '07 Human Language Technologies 2007: The Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics; Companion Volume, Short Papers
Reducing labeling effort for structured prediction tasks
AAAI'05 Proceedings of the 20th national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2
Automatically generating extraction patterns from untagged text
AAAI'96 Proceedings of the thirteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2
Hi-index | 0.00 |
In this paper we demonstrate and quantify the advantage gained by allowing relation extraction algorithms to make use of information about the cardinality of the target relation. The two algorithms presented herein differ only in their assumption about the nature of the target relation (one-to-many or many-to-many). The algorithms are tested on the same relation to show the degree of advantage gained by their differing assumptions. Comparison of the performance of the two algorithms on a one-to-many domain demonstrates the existence of several, previously undocumented behaviors which can be used to improve the performance of relation extraction algorithms. The first is a distinct, inverted u-shape in the initial portion of the recall curve of the many-to-many algorithm. The second is that, as the number of seeds increases, the rate of improvement of the two algorithms descreases to approach the rate at which new information is added via the seeds.