<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="W04-0840">
  <Title>Senseval 3 Logic Forms: A System and Possible Improvements</Title>
  <Section position="7" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
6 Recommendations
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The sample data provided for the LFI task was used as the model for expected system behavior.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> A few recommendations that we believe would be improvements are below. Note that neither space nor time permitted an extensive consideration of other alternatives.</Paragraph>
    <Section position="1" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
6.1 Possessive Pronouns
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> Possessive pronouns are treated as mere adjectives in the sample data. A better way would be to handle these as any other possession indicator, and thus treat them as two-argument predicates.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="1"> Example: S: John drives his car.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> LF (Sample data):</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="4"/>
    </Section>
    <Section position="2" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
6.2 Hybrid Verb Slot Representation
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> A verb's slots are supposed to signify their relation to the verb. The first slot is always reserved for the action/eventuality expressed by the verb.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="1"> The second, then, is always for the subject of the verb. Now, the third slot should be reserved for the direct object of the verb (if any), and then, additional slots should be filled if and only if there are indirect objects associated with the verb.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> We propose using either dummy or null arguments for certain slots. For instance, for a verb that has only indirect objects (apart from a subject), the representation for the verb can be, for instance, run:v_ (e1, x3, 0, x4, x6, ...), or run:v_ (e1, x3, x9, x4, x6, ...), where 'x9' is a dummy argument that is not referenced anywhere else in the Logic Form.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="3"> Moreover, the inclusion of prepositional attachments in the verb slots is a kind of redundancy that should be avoided. The following examples will make this proposal clear.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="4"> S: John plays at the park.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="6"> Note that none of the examples include the arguments for 'park' or 'library' in the slots for verbs. Since these predicates are already connected to the verbs via prepositions, it is unnecessary to also include them in verb slots.</Paragraph>
    </Section>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>