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

Lewis G. Creary

dblp:00/6811 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
3as first author
0since 2021 · last 1989
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 3 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 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.

Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Logic in computer science · 100%
Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
spatial reasoning
0.011989
Reference to Locations · ACL 1989
Logic in computer science › semantics
computational semantics
0.011985
A Computational Semantics for Natural Language · ACL 1985
Logic in computer science › formal semantics
natural language semantics
0.011985
A Computational Semantics for Natural Language · ACL 1985
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
propositional attitudes
0.011979
Propositional Attitudes: Fregean Representation and Simulative Reasoning · IJCAI 1979

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

simulative reasoning · 0.0fregean representation · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1989 Reference to Locations
abstract
We propose a semantics for locative expressions such as near Jones or west of Denver, an important subsystem for NLP applications. Locative expressions denote regions of space, and serve as arguments to predicates, locating objects and events spatially. Since simple locatives occupy argument positions, they do NOT participate in scope ambiguities---pace one common view, which sees locatives as logical operators. Our proposal justifies common representational practice in computational linguistics, accounting for how locative expressions function anaphorically, and explaining a wide range of inference involving locatives. We further demonstrate how the argument analysis may accommodate multiple locative arguments in a single predicate. The analysis is implemented for use in a database query application.
Lewis G. Creary, Jean Mark Gawron, John Nerbonne
ACL1
1985 A Computational Semantics for Natural Language
abstract
In the new Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) language processing system that is currently under development at Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, the Montagovian semantics of the earlier GPSG system (see [Gawron et al. 1982]) is replaced by a radically different approach with a number of distinct advantages. In place of the lambda calculus and standard first-order logic, our medium of conceptual representation is a new logical formalism called NFLT (Neo-Fregean Language of Thought); compositional semantics is effected, not by schematic lambda expressions, but by LISP procedures that operate on NFLT expressions to produce new expressions. NFLT has a number of features that make it well-suited for natural language translations, including predicates of variable arity in which explicitly marked situational roles supercede order-coded argument positions, sortally restricted quantification, a compositional (but nonextensional) semantics that handles causal contexts, and a principled conceptual raising mechanism that we expect to lead to a computationally tractable account of propositional attitudes. The use of semantically compositional LISP procedures in place of lambda-schemas allows us to produce fully reduced translations on the fly, with no need for post-processing. This approach should simplify the task of using semantic information (such as sortal incompatibilities) to eliminate bad parse paths.
Lewis G. Creary, Carl Pollard
ACL1
1979 Propositional Attitudes: Fregean Representation and Simulative Reasoning
Lewis G. Creary
IJCAI1