Difference between revisions of "Comparison of part-of-speech tagging systems"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Apertium would like to have really good part-of-speech tagging, but in many cases falls below the state-of-the-art (around 97% tagging accuracy). This page intends to collect a comparison of tagging systems in Apertium and give some ideas of what could be done to improve them. |
Apertium would like to have really good part-of-speech tagging, but in many cases falls below the state-of-the-art (around 97% tagging accuracy). This page intends to collect a comparison of tagging systems in Apertium and give some ideas of what could be done to improve them. |
||
+ | |||
+ | In the following table, the intervals represent the [low, high] values from 10-fold cross validation. |
||
{|class=wikitable |
{|class=wikitable |
Revision as of 16:32, 21 December 2015
Contents |
Apertium would like to have really good part-of-speech tagging, but in many cases falls below the state-of-the-art (around 97% tagging accuracy). This page intends to collect a comparison of tagging systems in Apertium and give some ideas of what could be done to improve them.
In the following table, the intervals represent the [low, high] values from 10-fold cross validation.
Language | System | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1st | CG+1st | Unigram | CG+Unigram | apertium-tagger | CG+apertium-tagger | |
Catalan | 81.85 | 83.96 | [75.65, 78.46] | [87.76, 90.48] | [94.16, 96.28] | [93.92, 96.16] |
Spanish | 86.18 | 86.71 | [78.20, 80.06] | [87.72, 90.27] | [90.15, 94.86] | [91.84, 93.70] |
Kazakh | 80.25 | 86.13 | [83.55, 86.19] | [83.33, 86.61] | n/a | n/a |
Todo
- Implement this tagger: https://spacy.io/blog/part-of-speech-POS-tagger-in-python