Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Annotated Corpora and Annotation Tools

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Anaphora Resolution

Abstract

In this chapter we review the currently available corpora to study anaphoric interpretation, and the tools that can be used to create new ones. A comprehensive survey of annotated corpora will be given, which ranges from the corpora and guidelines developed for the Message Understanding Conferences MUC-6 (1996) and MUC-7 (1998), which have been seminal to the field, to the resources that have been recently made available as part of the 2010 SemEval evaluation campaign. All fundamental design decisions regarding annotation formats and standards are described, and the relevant properties of the corpora are presented in a uniform and well-structured way. Moreover, three useful, widely used and freely available annotation tools (CALLISTO, MMAX2, and Palinka) will be described. They can be employed if own annotation work turns out to be indispensable.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://www.nist.gov/speech/tests/ace/index.html

  2. 2.

    As discussed in chapter “Linguistic and Cognitive Evidence About Anaphora”, many types of expressions in language are anaphoric to a degree, but the type of anaphoric reference most studied in computational linguistics, by far, is anaphoric reference via noun phrases, so in this chapter, as in the rest of the book, we will focus on coding schemes and corpora for np anaphoric reference.

  3. 3.

    http://kagonma.org/tagrin/

  4. 4.

    http://mitre.github.io/callisto/index.html

  5. 5.

    These are persons, organizations, locations, temporal expressions, and numerical expressions—see, e.g., [22].

  6. 6.

    http://www.itl.nist.gov/iad/mig//tests/ace/

  7. 7.

    npaper 9801.139

  8. 8.

    http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/Research/nle/corpora/GNOME/

  9. 9.

    The corpus was also subsequently used to study text structuring [38] and aggregation [13] as well as anaphora resolution [37].

  10. 10.

    http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/Research/nle/arrau/

  11. 11.

    http://www.ldc.upenn.edu/Catalog/catalogEntry.jsp?catalogId=LDC95S25

  12. 12.

    The anaphorically annotated versions of ldc corpora such as the rst Discourse Treebank and the trains-93 corpus require previous purchase of the original corpora.

  13. 13.

    http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/

  14. 14.

    http://clic.ub.edu/corpus/en

  15. 15.

    The portion of AnCora annotated with coreference information (AnCora-CO) amounts to a total of 400,000 words for each language.

  16. 16.

    Elliptical subjects were manually inserted as part of the treebank.

  17. 17.

    http://cemantix.org/software/ontonotes-db-tool.html

  18. 18.

    http://stel.ub.edu/semeval2010-coref

  19. 19.

    The morphosyntactic and semantic tag sets differ between languages.

  20. 20.

    In the case of OntoNotes, the singletons were heuristically added.

  21. 21.

    http://www.cst.dk/dad/

  22. 22.

    http://www.nactem.ac.uk/genia/

  23. 23.

    http://nlp.i2r.a-star.edu.sg/medco.html

  24. 24.

    http://www.anaphoricbank.org

  25. 25.

    http://stel.ub.edu/semeval2010-coref/

  26. 26.

    http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/~pajas/tred/

  27. 27.

    http://callisto.mitre.org/

  28. 28.

    http://mmax2.sourceforge.net/

  29. 29.

    http://clic.ub.edu/ancorapipe/

  30. 30.

    A notable exception is the OntoNotes corpus, where all semantic levels are stored in a unified format in a database [64].

  31. 31.

    http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/Research/nle/corpora/GNOME/anno_manual_4.htm

  32. 32.

    In muc and other projects, the muc scoring metric was used (see chapter “Evaluation Campaigns”). The muc-6 annotators reached an agreement level of F1 = 0. 83 [30], comparable with later efforts such as the German TüBa-D/Z corpus (F1 = 0. 83, [78]), or the Dutch corea corpus (F1 = 0. 76, [27]), which relied on more refined annotation guidelines.

  33. 33.

    Researchers working on languages for which not even chunkers exist need to be aware that the corpora they create will probably only be usable for linguistic studies.

References

  1. ACE: Annotation guidelines for entity detection and tracking (EDT) (2004). Version 4.2.6

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aone, C., Bennett, S.: Evaluating automated and manual acquisition of anaphora resolution strategies. In: Proceedings of ACL, Cambridge (1995)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Artstein, R., Poesio, M.: Inter-coder agreement for computational linguistics. Comput. Linguist. 34 (4), 555–596 (2008). An early version of this paper has been circulating since 2005 as “Kappa3 = Alpha (or Beta)”. This version is still available from the ARRAU website

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bard, E.G., Anderson, A.H., Sotillo, C., Aylett, M., Doherty-Sneddon, G., Newlands, A.: Controlling the intelligibility of referring expressions. J. Mem. Lang. 42, 1–22 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bird, S., Day, D., Garofolo, J., Henderson, J., Laprun, C., Liberman, M.: Atlas: a flexible and extensible architecture for linguistic annotation. http://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0007022 (2000)

  6. Botley, S.P.: Indirect anaphora: testing the limits of corpus-based linguistics. Int. J. Corpus Linguist. 11 (1), 73–112 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bretonnel Cohen, K., Verspoor, K., Bada, M., Funk, C., Hunter, L.: The Colorado richly annotated full text (CRAFT) corpus: multi-model annotation in the biomedical domain. In: Ide, N., Pustejovsky, J. (eds.) Handbook of Linguistic Annotation. Springer, Berlin (forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bruneseaux, F., Romary, L.: Codage des références et coréférences dans le dialogues homme-machine. In: Proceedings of ACH-ALLC, Kingston (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Byron, D.: Resolving pronominal references to abstract entities. In: Proceedings of the ACL, Philadelphia, pp. 80–87 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carletta, J.: Assessing agreement on classification tasks: the kappa statistic. Comput. Linguist. 22 (2), 249–254 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Carlson, L., Marcu, D., Okurowski, M.E.: Building a discourse-tagged corpus in the framework of rhetorical structure theory. In: van Kuppevelt, J., Smith, R. (eds.) Current Directions in Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 85–112. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht/Boston (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Chafe, W.L.: The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production. Ablex, Norwood (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cheng, H.: Modelling aggregation motivated interactions in descriptive text generation. Ph.D. thesis, Division of Informatics, the University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chinchor, N.A.: Overview of MUC-7/MET-2. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Message Understanding Conference (MUC-7), Fairfax (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Collovini, S., Carbonel, T., Thielsen Fuchs, J., Coelho, J.C., Rino, L., Vieira, R.: Summit: um corpus anotado com informa cões discursivas visando à sumariza cão automática. In: 52nd Workshop em Tecnologia da Informa cão e da Linguagem Humana (TIL’2007), Rio de Janeiro (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  16. van Deemter, K., Kibble, R.: On coreferring: coreference in MUC and related annotation schemes. Comput. Linguist. 26 (4), 629–637 (2000). Squib

    Google Scholar 

  17. Doddington, G., Mitchell, A., Przybocki, M., Ramshaw, L., Strassell, S., Weischedel, R.: The automatic content extraction (ACE) program–tasks, data, and evaluation. In: Proceedings of LREC, Athens (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gardent, C., Manuélian, H.: Création d’un corpus annoté pour le traitement des déscriptions d éfinies. Traitement Automatique des Langues 46 (1), 115–140 (2005). http://www.loria.fr/~gardent/publis/tal2005.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gasperin, C., Karamanis, N., Seal, R.: Annotation of anaphoric relations in biomedical full-text articles using a domain-relevant scheme. In: Proceedings of DAARC 2007, Lagos, pp. 19–24 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ge, N., Hale, J., Charniak, E.: A statistical approach to anaphora resolution. In: Proceedings of Sixth Workshop on Very Large Corpora (WVLC/EMNLP) (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Grishman, R.: Coreference task definition. Technical report, NYU (1995). http://www.cs.nyu.edu/cs/faculty/grishman/COtask21.book_1.html

    Google Scholar 

  22. Grishman, R.: Named entity task definition. Technical report, NYU (1995). http://www.cs.nyu.edu/cs/faculty/grishman/NEtask20.book_1.html

    Google Scholar 

  23. Grishman, R., Sundheim, B.: Design of the MUC-6 evalutation. In: Proceedings of the Sixth Message Understanding Conference (MUC-6), Columbia (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Grishman, R., Sundheim, B.: Message understanding conference-6: a brief history. In: Proceedings of the 16th COLING, COLING ’96, pp. 466–471. Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg (1996). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/992628.992709

  25. Hajič, J., Böhmová, A., Hajičová, E., Vidová-Hladká, B.: The Prague dependency treebank: a three-level annotation scenario. In: Abeillé, A. (ed.) Treebanks: Building and Using Parsed Corpora, pp. 103–127. Kluwer Academic, Amsterdam (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hasler, L., Orasan, C., Naumann, K.: NPs for events: experiments in coreference annotation. In: Proceedings of LREC, Genoa (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hendrickx, I., Bouma, G., Coppens, F., Daelemans, W., Hoste, V., Kloosterman, G., Mineur, A.M., Van Der Vloet, J., Verschelde, J.L.: A coreference corpus and resolution system for Dutch. In: Proceedings of LREC, Marrakech (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hinrichs, E., Kübler, S., Naumann, K.: A unified representation for morphological, syntactic, semantic and referential annotations. In: ACL Workshop on Frontiers in Corpus Annotation II: Pie in the Sky, Ann Arbor (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hirschman, L.: MUC-7 coreference task definition, version 3.0. In: Chinchor, N. (ed.) Proceedings of the 7th Message Understanding Conference (1998). Available at http://www.muc.saic.com/proceedings/muc_7_toc.html

  30. Hirschman, L., Robinson, P., Burger, J., Vilain, M.: Automating coreference: the role of automated training data. In: Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on Applying Machine Learning to Discourse Processing (1997). http://arxiv.org/pdf/cmp-lg/9803001

    Google Scholar 

  31. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2448119

  32. Ide, N.: Corpus encoding standard: SGML guidelines for encoding linguistic corpora. In: Proceedings of LREC, Granada (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ide, N., Pustejovsky, J. (eds.): Handbook of Linguistic Annotation. Springer, Berlin (forthcoming)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Iida, R., Komachi, M., Inui, K., Matsumoto, Y.: Annotating a Japanese text corpus with predicate-argument and coreference relations. In: Proceeding of the ACL Linguistic Annotation Workshop (LAW), Prague, pp. 132–139 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Iida, R., Poesio, M.: A cross-lingual ILP solution to zero anaphora resolution. In: Proceedings of ACL. ACL, Boulder (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Isard, A.: An XML architecture for the HCRC map task corpus. In: Kühnlein, P., Rieser, H., Zeevat, H. (eds.) Proceedings of BI-DIALOG (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kabadjov, M.A.: Task-oriented evaluation of anaphora resolution. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computing and Electronic Systems, University of Essex, Colchester (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Karamanis, N.: Entity coherence for descriptive text structuring. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh, Informatics (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Klein, M., Bernsen, N.O., Davies, S., Dybkjaer, L., Garrido, J., Kasch, H., Mengel, A., Pirelli, V., Poesio, M., Quazza, S., Soria, C.: Supported coding schemes. Deliverable 1.1, The MATE Consortium. mate.nis.sdu.dk/about/deliverables.html (1998)

  40. Krasavina, O., Chiarcos, C.: The potsdam coreference scheme. In: Proceedings of the 1st Linguistic Annotation Workshop, pp. 156–163 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kuc̆ová, L., Hajic̆ová, E.: Coreferential relations in the prague dependency treebank. In: Proceedings of DAARC, pp. 94–102 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  42. LDC: ACE (Automatic Content Extraction) English annotation guidelines for entities, version 5.6.1 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Magnini, B., Pianta, E., Girardi, C., Negri, M., Romano, L., Speranza, M., Lenzi, V.B., Sprugnoli, R.: I-cab: the italian content annotation bank. In: Proceedings of LREC, Genoa (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  44. McCarthy, J.F., Lehnert, W.G.: Using decision trees for coreference resolution. In: Proceedings of IJCAI, Monréal (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  45. McKelvie, D., Isard, A., Mengel, A., Moeller, M.B., Grosse, M., Klein, M.: The MATE workbench – an annotation tool for XML corpora. Speech Commun. 33 (1–2), 97–112 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Moser, M., Moore, J.D.: Toward a synthesis of two accounts of discourse structure. Comput. Linguist. 22 (3), 409–419 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Müller, M.C.: Fully automatic resolution of it, this and that in unrestricted multy-party dialog. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Tübingen (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Müller, C., Strube, M.: Multi-level annotation of linguistic data with mmax2. In: Braun, S., Kohn, K., Mukherjee, J. (eds.) Corpus Technology and Language Pedagogy. New Resources, New Tools, New Methods. English Corpus Linguistics, vol. 3, pp. 197–214. Peter Lang, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Navaretta, C.: Pronominal types and abstract reference in the Danish and Italian DAD Corpora. In: Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Anaphora Resolution (WAR II), Bergen. NEALT Proceedings Series, vol. 2, pp. 63–71 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Nguyen, N.L.T., Kim, J.D., Tsujii, J.: Challenges in pronoun resolution system for biomedical text. In: Proceedings of LREC, Marrakech (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Orasan, C.: Palinka: a highly customizable tool for discourse annotation. In: Proceedings of the 4th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue, Sapporo (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  52. Poesio, M.: Annotating a corpus to develop and evaluate discourse entity realization algorithms: issues and preliminary results. In: Proceedings of the 2nd LREC, Athens, pp. 211–218 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Poesio, M.: The GNOME Annotation Scheme Manual. University of Edinburgh, HCRC and Informatics, Scotland, fourth version edn. (2000). Available from http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/Research/nle/corpora/GNOME/anno_manual_4.htm

    Google Scholar 

  54. Poesio, M.: The MATE/GNOME scheme for anaphoric annotation, revisited. In: Proceedings of SIGDIAL, Boston (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Poesio, M., Artstein, R.: The reliability of anaphoric annotation, reconsidered: taking ambiguity into account. In: Meyers, A. (ed.) Proceedings of ACL Workshop on Frontiers in Corpus Annotation, Ann Arbor, pp. 76–83 (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  56. Poesio, M., Artstein, R.: Anaphoric annotation in the arrau corpus. In: Proceedings of LREC, Marrakesh (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Poesio, M., Bruneseaux, F., Romary, L.: The MATE meta-scheme for coreference in dialogues in multiple languages. In: Walker, M. (ed.) Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging, College Park, pp. 65–74 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Poesio, M., Delmonte, R., Bristot, A., Chiran, L., Tonelli, S.: The VENEX corpus of anaphoric information in spoken and written Italian (2004, in preparation). Available online at http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/staff/poesio/publications/VENEX04.pdf

  59. Poesio, M., Patel, A., Di Eugenio, B.: Discourse structure and anaphora in tutorial dialogues: an empirical analysis of two theories of the global focus. Res. Lang. Comput. 4, 229–257 (2006). Special Issue on Generation and Dialogue

    Google Scholar 

  60. Poesio, M., Stevenson, R., Di Eugenio, B., Hitzeman, J.M.: Centering: a parametric theory and its instantiations. Comput. Linguist. 30 (3), 309–363 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Poesio, M., Sturt, P., Arstein, R., Filik, R.: Underspecification and anaphora: theoretical issues and preliminary evidence. Discourse Process. 42 (2), 157–175 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Poesio, M., Vieira, R.: A corpus-based investigation of definite description use. Comput. Linguist. 24 (2), 183–216 (1998). Also available as Research Paper CCS-RP-71, Centre for Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  63. Postal, P.M.: Anaphoric islands. In: Binnick, R.I., et al. (ed.) Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 205–235. University of Chicago, Chicago (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Pradhan, S.S., Hovy, E., Marcus, M., Palmer, M., Ramshaw, L., Weischedel, R.: Ontonotes: a unified relational semantic representation. Int. J. Semant. Comput. 1 (4), 405–419 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Pradhan, S., Marcus, M., Palmer, M., Ramshaw, L., Weischedel, R., Xue, N.: CoNLL-2011 shared task: modeling unrestricted coreference in ontonotes. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL 2011), Portland (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Pradhan, S., Moschitti, A., Xue, N., Uryupina, O., Zhang, Y.: Conll-2012 shared task: modeling multilingual unrestricted coreference in ontonotes. In: Joint Conference on EMNLP and CoNLL – Shared Task, pp. 1–40. Association for Computational Linguistics, Jeju Island (2012). http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W12-4501

  67. Pradhan, S., Ramshaw, L., Weischedel, R., MacBride, J., Micciulla, L.: Unrestricted coreference: indentifying entities and events in OntoNotes. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC), Irvine (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  68. Recasens, M., Màrquez, L., Sapena, E., Martí, M.A., Taulé, M., Hoste, V., Poesio, M., Versley, Y.: Semeval-2010 task 1: coreference resolution in multiple languages. In: Proceedings of SEMEVAL, Uppsala (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Recasens, M., Martí, M.A.: Ancora-co: coreferentially annotated corpora for Spanish and Catalan. Lang. Resour. Eval. 44, 315–345 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Rodriguez, K.J., Delogu, F., Versley, Y., Stemle, E., Poesio, M.: Anaphoric annotation of wikipedia and blogs in the live memories corpus. In: Proceedings of LREC (poster), Malta (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Sgall, P., Hajicova, E., Panevova, J. (eds.): The Meaning of the Sentence in Its Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects. D. Reidel, Dordrecht/Boston (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  72. Sobha, L., Bandyopadhyay, S., Vijay Sundar Ram, R., Akilandeswari, A.: NLP tool contest @ICON2011 on anaphora resolution in Indian languages. In: Proceedings of ICON, Singapore (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., Burnard, L. (eds.): Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange (TEI P3). Text Encoding Initiative, Oxford (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Stede, M.: The Potsdam Commentary Corpus. In: ACL’04 Workshop on Discourse Annotation, Barcelona (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  75. Su, J., Yang, X., Hong, H., Tateisi, Y., Tsujii, J.: Coreference resolution in biomedical texts: a machine learning approach. Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings. 08131 – Ontologies and Text Mining for Life Sciences: Current Status and Future Perspectives (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  76. Taulé, M., Martí, M.A., Recasens, M.: AnCora: multilevel annotated corpora for Catalan and Spanish. In: Proceedings of LREC, Marrakech, pp. 96–101 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  77. Tutin, A., Trouilleux, F., Clouzot, C., Gaussier, E., Zaenen, A., Rayot, S., Antoniadis, G.: Annotating a large corpus with anaphoric links. In: Proceedings of DAARC, Lancaster (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  78. Versley, Y.: Vagueness and referential ambiguity in a large-scale annotated corpus. Res. Lang. Comput. 6 (3–4), 333–353 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Wagner, A., Zeisler, B.: A syntactically annotated corpus of Tibetan. In: Proceedings of LREC, Lisbon (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  80. Walker, C., Strassel, S., Medero, J., Maeda, K.: ACE 2005 Multilingual Training Corpus. LDC2006T06. Linguistic Data Consortium, Philadelphia (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  81. Ward, G., Sproat, R., McKoon, G.: A pragmatic analysis of so-called anaphoric islands. Language 67, 439–474 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Weischedel, R., Hovy, E., Marcus, M., Palmer, M., Belvin, R., Pradhan, S., Ramshaw, L., Xue, N.: OntoNotes: a large training corpus for enhanced processing. In: Olive, J., Christianson, C., McCary, J. (eds.) Handbook of Natural Language Processing and Machine Translation: DARPA Global Autonomous Language Exploitation. Springer, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  83. Weischedel, R., Pradhan, S., Ramshaw, L., Palmer, M., Xue, N., Marcus, M., Taylor, A., Greenberg, C., Hovy, E., Belvin, R., Houston, A.: Ontonotes Release 2.0. LDC2008T04. Linguistic Data Consortium, Philadelphia (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by a PhD studentship offered by Cogito/Expert Systems (Kepa Rodriguez), in part by the LiveMemories project (Poesio), and in part by the sensei project (Poesio).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester, UK

    Massimo Poesio

  2. Boulder Learning, Inc., Boulder, CO, USA

    Sameer Pradhan

  3. Google Inc., Stanford, CA, USA

    Marta Recasens

  4. Yad Vashem Archives, Jerusalem, Israel

    Kepa Rodriguez

  5. University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Yannick Versley

Authors
  1. Massimo Poesio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sameer Pradhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marta Recasens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kepa Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yannick Versley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Massimo Poesio .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Trento, Italy

    Massimo Poesio

  2. Frankfurt am Main, Germany

    Roland Stuckardt

  3. Heidelberg, Germany

    Yannick Versley

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Poesio, M., Pradhan, S., Recasens, M., Rodriguez, K., Versley, Y. (2016). Annotated Corpora and Annotation Tools. In: Poesio, M., Stuckardt, R., Versley, Y. (eds) Anaphora Resolution. Theory and Applications of Natural Language Processing. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47909-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47909-4_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-47908-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-47909-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation