You are viewing the archive of PolEval 2018.Go to the current edition, PolEval 2026 →
PolEval 2018›Tasks›Task 1

Dependency Parsing

Task definition

The proposed task consists in creating dependency parsers for Polish. Dependency parsers should be trained on trees from Polish Dependency Bank formatted according to the guidelines of Universal Dependency v2 (http://universaldependencies.org/guidelines.html). The task is open to everyone. Participants can take part in one of two subtasks or in both subtasks. We strongly encourage system developers from Poland and abroad to participate in the task.

Subtask (A): Morphosyntactic prediction of dependency trees

Participating systems will have to predict labelled dependency trees for tokenised sentences and morphosyntactic analyses of the sentences’ tokens. In a dependency tree each node (except for the root node) depends on exactly one governing node (HEAD) and the relation between these nodes is labelled with a universal dependency type possibly with a Polish-specific subtype extension (DEPREL). Morphosyntactic analysis, in turn, consists in predicting universal part-of-speech tags (UPOS), Polish-specific tags (XPOS), morphological features (FEATS), and lemmas (LEMMA) of particular tokens. If participants do not aim at predicting morphosyntactic analysis of Polish tokens, their systems can predict only dependency trees. In the test phase, we will make accessible a file with sentences automatically morphosyntactically analysed with a publically available system, e.g. UDPipe.

Subtask (B): Beyond dependency tree

Participants are encouraged to predict labelled dependency graphs (i.e. dependency trees + possible enhanced edges) and semantic labels which some relations are additionally annotated with. The enhanced edges encode shared dependents of coordinated elements (e.g. Piotr wstał i wyszedł. ‘Piotr stood up and left.’) and shared governors of coordinated elements (e.g. Lubimy babeczki i ciasteczka. `We like cupcakes and cookies.’). The additional semantic labels (e.g. ‘Experiencer’, ‘Place’, ‘Condition’) extend semantic meaning of indirect objects (iobj), oblique nominals (obl), adverbial clause modifiers (advcl), some adverbial modifiers (advmod), some noun modifiers (nmod), etc. Note that the semantic labels are in an additional 11th column of the CoNLL-U format. 

Training data

Subtask A

DOWNLOAD: Task 1 (A) - development data
DOWNLOAD: Task 1 (A) - training data

Subtask B

DOWNLOAD: Task 1 (B) - development data
DOWNLOAD: Task 1 (B) - training data

Test data

Test sentences are manually tokenised (gold standard tokens). LEMMA, UPOS, XPOS, and FEATS are automatically predicted with UDPipe 1.2 trained on the training data set.

Subtask A

DOWNLOAD: Task 1 (A) - test data

Subtask B

DOWNLOAD: Task 1 (B) - test data

Evaluation procedure

The participating systems should output trees in CoNLL-U format with the standard 10 columns in the subtask (A) or 11 columns in the subtask (B). Output trees will be evaluated with a slightly modified version of the evaluation script prepared for the purpose of CoNLL 2018 shared task on Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies.

In contrast to CoNLL 2018 shared task, we will evaluate prediction of full dependency labels (universal dependency type + Polish-specific subtype) and all morphological features with LAS, MLAS, and BLEX measures. Additionally, we define two other measures ELAS and SLAS for evaluation of dependency graphs and semantic labels.
ELAS and SLAS are harmonic means (F1) of precision P and recall R:

ELAS = 2PR / (P+R)

ELAS (enhanced labelled attachment score) is designed for the purpose of evaluating dependency graphs with enhanced edges. ELAS is a strict extension of LAS, i.e. a token must be assigned a correct main governor (7th column), main dependency relation (8th column) and a correct set of enhanced governors (9th column). Precision P and recall R are defined as follows.
Precision P is the ratio of the number of the correct words to the total number of the predicted nodes. Recall R is the ratio of the number of the correct words to the total number of the gold standard nodes.
A word is considered to be correct if several conditions are met:

  • a token S is assigned the correct head G and the correct dependency type,

  • a token S is assigned correct enhanced heads EG and the correct enhanced dependency types.

SLAS (semantic-aware labelled attachment score) is defined to evaluate dependency trees with semantic labels. Precision P and recall R are defined as follows.
Precision P is the ratio of the number of correct words to the total number of predicted content words. Recall R is the ratio of the number of the correct words to the total number of the gold standard content words.
A word is considered to be a content word if it fulfils one of the following content functions: nsubj, obj, iobj, csubj, ccomp, xcomp, obl, vocative, expl, dislocated, advcl, advmod, discourse, nmod, appos, nummod, acl, amod, conj, fixed, flat, compound, list, parataxis, orphan, root. A predicted word S is considered to be a correct word, if several conditions are met:

  • S and G fulfil the identical content functions,

  • S and G are correctly labelled with a semantic label or are correctly left unlabelled.

Additional resources

The following additional resources can be used in training dependency parsers of Polish:

References

Description of CoNLL 2018 shared task on Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies
http://universaldependencies.org/conll18