Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Sarah Alsayyahi

dblp:359/5787 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Information extraction and text analysis · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › relation extraction › event relation extraction
temporal relation extraction
0.712023
TIMELINE: Exhaustive Annotation of Temporal Relations Supporting the Automatic Ordering of Events in News Articles · EMNLP 2023
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › temporal information extraction
temporal ordering
0.212023
TIMELINE: Exhaustive Annotation of Temporal Relations Supporting the Automatic Ordering of Events in News Articles · EMNLP 2023

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

temporal relation annotation · 0.7annotation scheme · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 TIMELINE: Exhaustive Annotation of Temporal Relations Supporting the Automatic Ordering of Events in News Articles
abstract
Temporal relation extraction models have thus far been hindered by a number of issues in existing temporal relation-annotated news datasets, including: (1) low inter-annotator agreement due to the lack of specificity of their annotation guidelines in terms of what counts as a temporal relation; (2) the exclusion of long-distance relations within a given document (those spanning across different paragraphs); and (3) the exclusion of events that are not centred on verbs.This paper aims to alleviate these issues by presenting a new annotation scheme that clearly defines the criteria based on which temporal relations should be annotated.Additionally, the scheme includes events even if they are not expressed as verbs (e.g., nominalised events).Furthermore, we propose a method for annotating all temporal relations-including long-distance ones-which automates the process, hence reducing time and manual effort on the part of annotators.The result is a new dataset, the TIMELINE corpus, in which improved inter-annotator agreement was obtained, in comparison with previously reported temporal relation datasets.We report the results of training and evaluating baseline temporal relation extraction models on the new corpus, and compare them with results obtained on the widely used MATRES corpus.
Sarah Alsayyahi, Riza Theresa Batista-Navarro
EMNLP1