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

Graham Russell

dblp:41/3402 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
11ranked-venue papers
5as first author
0since 2021 · last 2003
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 11 · 5 first-author

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
2 papers
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 54% Information extraction and text analysis · 31% Language models and text generation · 16%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › description logic › taxonomic reasoning
inheritance
0.011991
Multipe Default Inheritance in a Unification-Based Lexicon · ACL 1991
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › nonmonotonic reasoning › defeasible reasoning
inheritance with exceptions
0.011991
Multipe Default Inheritance in a Unification-Based Lexicon · ACL 1991
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › constraint-based grammar
unification-based grammar
0.011991
Multipe Default Inheritance in a Unification-Based Lexicon · ACL 1991
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
syntactic parsing
0.011990
Asymmetry in Parsing and Generating with Unification Grammars: Case Studies from ELU · ACL 1990
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis › syntactic parsing
unification-based parsing
0.011990
Asymmetry in Parsing and Generating with Unification Grammars: Case Studies from ELU · ACL 1990

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

unification-based grammar · 0.0multiple inheritance · 0.0unification grammar · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2003 Statistical machine translation: rapid development with limited resources
abstract
We describe an experiment in rapid development of a statistical machine translation (SMT) system from scratch, using limited resources: under this heading we include not only training data, but also computing power, linguistic knowledge, programming effort, and absolute time.
George F. Foster, Simona Gandrabur, Philippe Langlais, Pierre Plamondon, Graham Russell, Michel Simard
MTSummit5
1994 LHIP: Extended DCGs for Configurable Robust Parsing
Afzal Ballim, Graham Russell
COLING2
1992 A Practical Approach to Multiple Default Inheritance for Unification-Based Lexicons
Graham Russell, Afzal Ballim, John Carroll 0001, Susan Warwick-Armstrong
Comput. Linguistics1
1991 Multipe Default Inheritance in a Unification-Based Lexicon
abstract
A formalism is presented for lexical specification in unification-based grammars which exploits defeasible multiple inheritance to express regularity, sub-regularity, and exceptions in classifying the properties of words. Such systems are in the general case intractable; the present proposal represents an attempt to reduce complexity while retaining sufficient expressive power for the task at hand. Illustrative examples are given of morphological analyses from English and German.
Graham Russell, John Carroll 0001, Susan Warwick-Armstrong
ACL1
1991 A Language for the Statement of Binary Relations over Feature Structures
Graham Russell, Afzal Ballim, Dominique Estival, Susan Warwick-Armstrong
EACL1
1990 Asymmetry in Parsing and Generating with Unification Grammars: Case Studies from ELU
abstract
Recent developments in generation algorithms have enabled work in unification-based computational linguistics to approach more closely the ideal of grammars as declarative statements of linguistic facts, neutral between analysis and synthesis. From this perspective, however, the situation is still far from perfect; all known methods of generation impose constraints on the grammars they assume.We briefly consider a number of proposals for generation, outlining their consequences for the form of grammars, and then report on experience arising from the addition of a generator to an existing unification environment. The algorithm in question (based on that of Shieber et al. (1989)), though among the most permissive currently available, excludes certain classes of parsable analyses.
Graham Russell, Susan Warwick-Armstrong, John Carroll 0001
ACL1
1988 Book reviews
Glyn Morrill, Peter Lau, George Dunbar, Lee Fedder, Robert E. Frederking, Danny Jones, John S. White, Christoph Zähner, Graham Russell
Mach. Transl.10
1988 Book reviews
Glyn Morrill, John S. White, Christoph Zähner, Graham Russell
Mach. Transl.4
1987 Formalisms For Morphographemic Description
Alan W. Black, Graeme D. Ritchie, Stephen G. Pulman, Graham Russell
EACL4
1987 A Computational Framework for Lexical Description
Graeme D. Ritchie, Stephen G. Pulman, Alan W. Black, Graham Russell
Comput. Linguistics4
1986 A Dictionary and Morphological Analyser for English
Graham Russell, Stephen G. Pulman, Graeme D. Ritchie, Alan W. Black
COLING1