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

Peter-Arno Coppen

dblp:06/4420 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
6ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2010
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2

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.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Information retrieval · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Information retrieval › question answering
answer extraction
0.112007
Evaluating discourse-based answer extraction for why-question answering · SIGIR 2007
Information retrieval
question answering and dialogue systems
0.112007
Evaluating discourse-based answer extraction for why-question answering · SIGIR 2007
Information retrieval › question answering
why-question answering
0.112007
Evaluating discourse-based answer extraction for why-question answering · SIGIR 2007

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

discourse analysis · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2010 What Is Not in the Bag of Words for Why-QA?
abstract
While developing an approach to why-QA, we extended a passage retrieval system that uses off-the-shelf retrieval technology with a re-ranking step incorporating structural information. We get significantly higher scores in terms of MRR@150 (from 0.25 to 0.34) and success@10. The 23% improvement that we reach in terms of MRR is comparable to the improvement reached on different QA tasks by other researchers in the field, although our re-ranking approach is based on relatively lightweight overlap measures incorporating syntactic constituents, cue words, and document structure.
Suzan Verberne, Lou Boves, Nelleke Oostdijk, Peter-Arno Coppen
Comput. Linguistics4
2008 Using Syntactic Information for Improving Why-Question Answering
Suzan Verberne, Lou Boves, Nelleke Oostdijk, Peter-Arno Coppen
COLING4
2008 Evaluating Paragraph Retrieval for
Suzan Verberne, Lou Boves, Nelleke Oostdijk, Peter-Arno Coppen
ECIR4
2007 Evaluating discourse-based answer extraction for why-question answering
abstract
No abstract available.
Suzan Verberne, Lou Boves, Nelleke Oostdijk, Peter-Arno Coppen
SIGIR4
2006 Data for question answering: The case of why
Suzan Verberne, Lou Boves, Nelleke Oostdijk, Peter-Arno Coppen
LREC4
2002 Using Grammatical Description as a Metalanguage Resource
Folkert de Vriend, Peter-Arno Coppen, W. Haeseryn
LREC2