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

Paul S. Jacobs

dblp:65/4394 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
24ranked-venue papers
18as first author
0since 2021 · last 1994
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 21 · 17 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 6 · 6 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 5 · 2 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
8 papers
Information extraction and text analysis · 71% Language models and text generation · 16% Knowledge representation and reasoning · 8%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Information retrieval · 100%

Topics — the 9 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
syntactic parsing
0.011992
Parsing Run Amok: Relation-Driven Control for Text Analysis · AAAI 1992
Information retrieval
indexing
0.011991
Creating Segmented Databases from Free Text for Text Retrieval · SIGIR 1991
Information retrieval › indexing
text indexing
0.011991
Creating Segmented Databases from Free Text for Text Retrieval · SIGIR 1991
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
text generation
0.021987
Knowledge-Intensive Natural Language Generation · Artif. Intell. 1987
Generation in a Natural Language Interface · IJCAI 1983
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
lexical acquisition
0.011988
Acquiring Lexical Knowledge from Text: A Case Study · AAAI 1988
Information retrieval › text analysis
Natural language processing for IR
0.011988
Natural Language Techniques for Intelligent Information Retrieval · SIGIR 1988
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
lexical resources
0.011987
FLUSH: A Flexible Lexicon Design · ACL 1987
Natural language and speech › Question answering and dialogue systems
natural language interface
0.011983
Generation in a Natural Language Interface · IJCAI 1983
Natural language and speech › Information extraction and text analysis
lexical semantics
0.011988
Acquiring Lexical Knowledge from Text: A Case Study · AAAI 1988

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

text analysis · 0.0symbolic reasoning · 0.0parsing · 0.0knowledge representation · 0.0text mining · 0.0natural language processing · 0.0knowledge-based lexicon design · 0.0generation · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1994 Word Sense Acquisition For Multilingual Text Interpretation
Paul S. Jacobs
COLING1
1994 Text-Based Systems and Information Management: Artificial Intelligence Confronts Matters of Scale
abstract
Many of the more ambitious goals of artificial intelligence have proved unattainable because of the failure of the many small, successful systems to scale up. The general use of technologies such as natural language interfaces and expert systems has done little to alleviate the basic difficulties and overwhelming cost of knowledge engineering. At the same time, emerging text processing techniques, including data extraction from text and new text retrieval methods, offer a means of accessing stores of information many times larger than any organized knowledge base or database. Although knowledge acquisition from text is at the heart of the information management problem, interpreting text, paradoxically, requires large amounts of knowledge, mainly about the way words are used in context. In other words, before intelligent text processing systems can be trained to mine for useful knowledge, they must already have enough knowledge to interpret what they read. The point at which there is "enough", is still a matter of debate, as no real program seems close to having enough knowledge to achieve general human-like understanding. Current research in large-scale natural language processing has come, rightly, to focus on lexical acquisition as the key to future progress. Unfortunately, the current state of the art is quite far from the recipe for acquiring knowledge about words, because it leans too heavily on resources that are available, without consideration for what is needed.>
Paul S. Jacobs
ICTAI1
1994 Text-Based Intelligent Systems
Peter Norvig, Paul S. Jacobs
Artif. Intell.2
1993 Innovations in Text Interpretation
Paul S. Jacobs, Lisa F. Rau
Artif. Intell.1
1992 Parsing Run Amok: Relation-Driven Control for Text Analysis
Paul S. Jacobs
AAAI1
1992 TRUMP: A transportable language understanding program
abstract
Transportability has perpetually been the nemesis of natural language processing systems, in both the research and commercial sectors. During the last 20 years, the technology has not moved much closer to providing robust coverage of everyday language, and has failed to produce commercial successes beyond a few specialized interfaces and application programs. the redesign required for each application has limited the impact of natural language systems. Trump (TRansportable Understanding Mechanism Package) is a natural language analyzer that functions in a variety of domains, in both interfaces and text processing. While other similar efforts have treated transportability as a problem in knowledge engineering, Trump instead relies mainly on a “core” of knowledge about language and a set of techniques for applying that knowledge within a domain. the information about words, word meanings, and linguistic relations in this generic knowledge base guides the conceptual framework of language interpretation in each domain. Turmp uses this core knowledge to piece together a conceptual representation of a natural language input by combining generic and specialized inforamtion. the result has been a language processing system that is capable of performing fairly extensive analysis with a minimum of customization for each application.
Paul S. Jacobs
Int. J. Intell. Syst.1
1991 Creating Segmented Databases from Free Text for Text Retrieval
abstract
Indexing text for accurate retrieval ZS a dificuli and in)portant problem.. On-ltne information services generally depend on "keyword" mdtces rather ihat~other methods of retrieval, because of the pract~cal jealures of keywords for storage, dtssemtnatlonj and browsing m well as for
Lisa F. Rau, Paul S. Jacobs
SIGIR2
1990 To Parse or Not to Parse: Relation-Driven Text Skimming
Paul S. Jacobs
COLING1
1990 The GE NLToolset: A Software Foundation for Intelligent Text Processing
Paul S. Jacobs, Lisa F. Rau
COLING1
1990 Tagging for Learning: Collecting Thematic Relations from Corpus
Uri Zernik, Paul S. Jacobs
COLING2
1989 NL ∩ IR: Natural language for information retrieval
abstract
Neither natural language processing nor information retrieval is any longer a young field, but the two areas have yet to achieve a graceful interaction. Mainly, the reason for this incompatibility is that information retrieval technology depends upon relatively simple but robust methods, while natural language processing involves complex knowledge-based systems that have never approached robustness. We provide an analysis of areas in which natural language and information retrieval come together, and describe a system that joins the two fields by combining technology, choice of application area, and knowledge acquisition techniques.
Lisa F. Rau, Paul S. Jacobs
Int. J. Intell. Syst.2
1989 Information extraction and text summarization using linguistic knowledge acquisition
Lisa F. Rau, Paul S. Jacobs, Uri Zernik
Inf. Process. Manag.2
1988 Acquiring Lexical Knowledge from Text: A Case Study
Paul S. Jacobs, Uri Zernik
AAAI1
1988 Achieving bidirectionality
Paul S. Jacobs
COLING1
1988 Concretion: assumption-based understanding
Paul S. Jacobs
COLING1
1988 Natural Language Techniques for Intelligent Information Retrieval
abstract
Neither natural language processing nor information retrieval is any longer a young field, but the two areas have yet to achieve a graceful interaction. Mainly, the reason for this incompatibility is that information retrieval technology depends upon relatively simple but robust methods, while natural language processing involves complex knowledge-based systems that have never approached robustness. We provide an analysis of areas in which natural language and information retrieval come together, and describe a system that joins the two fields by combining technology, choice of application area, and knowledge acquisition techniques.
Paul S. Jacobs, Lisa F. Rau
SIGIR1
1987 FLUSH: A Flexible Lexicon Design
abstract
Approaches to natural language processing that use a phrasal lexicon have the advantage of easily handling linguistic constructions that might otherwise be extragrammatical. However, current phrasal lexicons are often too rigid: their phrasal entries fail to cover the more flexible constructions. FLUSH, for Flexible Lexicon Utilizing Specialized and Hierarchical knowledge, is a knowledge-based lexicon design that allows broad phrasal coverage.
David J. Besemer, Paul S. Jacobs
ACL2
1987 A Knowledge Framework for Natural Language Analysis
Paul S. Jacobs
IJCAI1
1987 Knowledge-Intensive Natural Language Generation
Paul S. Jacobs
Artif. Intell.1
1986 Knowledge Structures for Natural Language Generation
Paul S. Jacobs
COLING1
1986 The KING Natural Language Generator
Paul S. Jacobs
ECAI1
1985 PHRED: A Generator for Natural Language Interfaces
Paul S. Jacobs
Comput. Linguistics1
1984 Ace: Associating Language with Meaning
Paul S. Jacobs, Lisa F. Rau
ECAI1
1983 Generation in a Natural Language Interface
Paul S. Jacobs
IJCAI1