<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="M92-1006">
  <Title>GE ADJUNCT TEST REPORT : OBJECT-ORIENTED DESIGN AND SCORING FOR MUC- 4</Title>
  <Section position="10" start_page="84" end_page="84" type="ackno">
    <SectionTitle>
PART II: TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSI S
(SITE REPORTS)
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The papers in this section were prepared by each of the sites that complete d the MUC-4 evaluation . The papers are intended to provide the reader with som e context for interpreting the test results, which are presented more fully i n appendices G and H of the proceedings . The sites were asked to comment on the following aspects of their MUC-4 experience : * Explanation of test settings (precision/recall/overgeneration ) and how these settings were chosen * Where bulk of effort was spent, and how much time was spen t overall on MUC- 4 * What the limiting factor was (time, people, CPU cycles , knowledge, . . .) * How the training of the system was don e What proportion of the training data was used (and how ) Whether/Why/How the system improved over time, an d how much of the training was automate d * What was successful and what wasn't, and what system module you would most like to rewrit e * What portion of the system is reusable on a different applicatio n * What was learned about the system, about a MUC-like task, about evaluation</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>