HCLSIG/SWANSIOC/Actions/RhetoricalStructure/meetings/20110328

From W3C Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Agenda March 28 Scientific Discourse call

IRC Notes:

10:04	Anita This is from a talk I gave here:	http://ilk.uvt.nl/amicus/
10:06	Anita	http://www.tei-c.org/index.xml
10:06	Gully	Anita: Text Encoding Initiative meeting
10:07	Gully	Text motifs in fairytales and other stories
10:07	Anita	http://www.slideshare.net/anitawaard/a-syntagmaticparadigmatic-analysis-of-scientific-text
10:07	Howard	Anita might to set up another amicus meeting at the next TEI meeting
10:09	Howard	Anita: there are several definitions of "syntagmatic" and "paradigmatic";
10:35	Anita	Gully: what is this useful for in text mining context?
10:37	Howard	Gully: Is use in validating the schema of a paper; vs use in validating semantic analysis of a text?
10:37	Anita	You can a) analyse a bunch of text with it, to validate the theory b) use this approach as a basis for semantic analysis - how do people talk about e.g. micoRNAs? How to link to infrastructure?
10:37	Jess	it's in the relationships between the chunks she's identified
10:38	Gully	Want to drive toward hypothesis - claim - network
10:39	Howard	Anita: I'd like to identify series of texts in which we can go from experiments to conceptual statements
10:40	Anita	Jess - fascinating comment! Can you elucidate?
10:40	Anita	Gully: find the hooks by which we can link the linguistic representation to a computational approach!
10:40	Jess	Well, what you've done is identify good, somewhat self encapsulated chunks which play dfferent roles in the structure of the text
10:41	Jess	but it's what makes the concepts different from "experimental" chunks that really captures the story
10:41	Jess	We can apply those labels, but how do we use those labels to know something about the schema?
10:42	Howard	pragmatic computational approach is difficult to link to language in text which itself may be complex
10:42	Anita	How do you know what label to apply to which segment, is that the question?
10:45	Anita	Ontologists step into the fray here: provide beliefs and domain models etc.
10:45	Howard	Anita: In her thesis, she has studied the effect of changing tense of verbs used in statements: people change their interpretation about what is fact vs conclustion
10:46	Anita	Gully: Need a domain where 'ontological structure' is not too complicated - find a model corpus, then find components that link to the text
10:47	Howard	Gully: First identify "things" being discussed in paper from the connections derived in the conceptual interpretation
10:48	Anita	Look at how things are used in a different context, conceptual discussions vs. experimental observations - e.g. in neural connectivity: brain structures are basic components, looking for tracers there; neural connections are conceptual components!
10:51	Anita	Alex: are there methods to find these rhetorical structures?
10:51	Anita	de Waard, A. Buitelaar, P., & Eigner, T. (2009b), Identifying the Epistemic Value of Discourse Segments in Biology Texts, In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Computational Semantics, Tilburg, The Netherlands, Jan.7-9 2009.
10:55	Anita	Howard: scientists have a reputation of not being good writers!
10:56	Anita	Paolo - no updates... Will talk about Open Annotation work at a future meeting!
10:57	Howard	Anita: I don't agree that scientists, in fact, are poor writers. It is however a specialized domain of discourse.
10:57	Anita	Howard yes I agree!
10:58	Howard	It would be good to discuss paradigmatic and syntagmatic offline.
10:59	Anita	Anita: I don’t think papers can be replaced by nanopublications - we need the rhetorical bits
11:00	Anita	Gully: but that is not the goal - just to represent the barebones of the findings! So: we are complementary.