Skip to main content

A Comparison of Classifiers for Detecting Hedges

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 264))

Abstract

A hedge is a linguistic device used to avoid using a categorical sentence. Hedges can be used to determine whether a sentence is factual by merely regarding a sentence containing hedges as non-factual. In this paper, we perform a comparative experiment of various classification methods for hedge detection. Among four different classification methods, we observe that SVM shows the best performance and that the SVM-based method finally outperforms the best system in the CoNLL2010-ST task.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Lakoff, G.: Hedges: a study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Chicago Linguistics Society Papers 8, 183–228 (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hyland, K.: Persuasion, interaction and the construction of knowledge: representing self and others in research writing. International Journal of English Studies 8(2), 8–18 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Light, M., Qiu, X.Y., Srinivasan, P.: The language of bioscience: facts, speculations, and statements in between. In: Proceedings of BioLINK 2004: Linking Biological Literature, Ontologies and Databases, pp. 17–24 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Medlock, B., Briscoe, T.: Weakly supervised learning for hedge classification in scientific literature. In: Proceedings of 45th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 992–999 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Szarvas, G.: Hedge classification in biomedical texts with a weakly supervised selection of keywords. In: Proceedings of 46th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 281–289 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Morante, R., Daelemans, W.: Learning the scope of hedge cues in biomedical texts. In: Proceedings of the BioNLP 2009 Workshop, pp. 28–36 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Farkas, R., Vincze, V., Mora, G., Csirik, J., Szarvas, G.: The CoNLL 2010 Shared Task: Learning to Detect Hedges and their Scope in Natural Language Text. In: Proceedings of the Shared Task, 14th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, Sweden, pp. 1–12 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Tang, B., Wang, X., Yuan, B., Fan, S.: A Cascade Method for Detecting Hedges and their Scope in Natural Language Text. In: Proceedings of the Shared Task, 14th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, Sweden, pp. 13–17 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Li, X., Shen, J., Gao, X., Wang, X.: Exploiting Rich Features for Detecting Hedges and Their Scope. In: Proceedings of the Shared Task, 14th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, Sweden, pp. 78–83 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Zhou, H., Li, X., Huang, D., Li, Z., Yang, Y.: Exploiting Multi-Features to Detect Hedges and Their Scope in Biomedical Texts. In: Proceedings of the Shared Task, 14th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, Sweden, pp. 106–113 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sang, T.K., Veenstra, J.: Representing Text Chunks. In: Proc. of EACL 1999, pp. 173–179 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tsuruoka, Y., Tateishi, Y., Kim, J.-D., Ohta, T., McNaught, J., Ananiadou, S., Tsujii, J.: Developing a Robust Part-of-Speech Tagger for Biomedical Text. In: Bozanis, P., Houstis, E.N. (eds.) PCI 2005. LNCS, vol. 3746, pp. 382–392. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kang, SJ., Kang, IS., Na, SH. (2011). A Comparison of Classifiers for Detecting Hedges. In: Kim, Th., et al. U- and E-Service, Science and Technology. UNESST 2011. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 264. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27210-3_32

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27210-3_32

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-27209-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-27210-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics