From W3C Wiki
Agenda March 28 Scientific Discourse call
- Talk by Anita de Waard: "Syntagmatic and Paradigmatic analysis of scientific text"
- Ontologies update: Dexi/Bibo/ORB/others
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.