Toward Language-dependent Applications
Machine Translation
Evaluating CETEMPúblico, a free resource for Portuguese
ACL '01 Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
Cooperatively evaluating portuguese morphology
PROPOR'03 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Computational processing of the Portuguese language
Second HAREM: New Challenges and Old Wisdom
PROPOR '08 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Computational Processing of the Portuguese Language
GikiP at GeoCLEF 2008: joining GIR and QA forces for querying Wikipedia
CLEF'08 Proceedings of the 9th Cross-language evaluation forum conference on Evaluating systems for multilingual and multimodal information access
GikiCLEF: expectations and lessons learned
CLEF'09 Proceedings of the 10th cross-language evaluation forum conference on Multilingual information access evaluation: text retrieval experiments
Overview of the CLEF 2005 multilingual question answering track
CLEF'05 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Cross-Language Evalution Forum: accessing Multilingual Information Repositories
CLEF'05 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Cross-Language Evalution Forum: accessing Multilingual Information Repositories
Toponym disambiguation using ontology-based semantic similarity
PROPOR'12 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Computational Processing of the Portuguese Language
Overview of the CLEF 2006 multilingual question answering track
CLEF'06 Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Cross-Language Evaluation Forum: evaluation of multilingual and multi-modal information retrieval
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
In this paper we report the work done by Linguateca in order to add Portuguese to two tracks of CLEF, namely the ad hoc IR and the QA tracks. We start with a brief description of Linguateca's aims and the way we see CLEF from the standpoint of Portuguese language processing. We then comment on several interesting problems that emerged during our work and offer some suggestions for improvement, and finally raise some possibly controversial points for discussion.