The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Proposition Bank: An Annotated Corpus of Semantic Roles
Open accessAbstract
The Proposition Bank project takes a practical approach to semantic representation, adding a layer of predicate-argument information, or semantic role labels, to the syntactic structures of the Penn Treebank. The resulting resource can be thought of as shallow, in that it does not represent coreference, quantification, and many other higher-order phenomena, but also broad, in that it covers every instance of every verb in the corpus and allows representative statistics to be calculated. We discuss the criteria used to define the sets of semantic roles used in the annotation process and to analyze the frequency of syntactic/semantic alternations in the corpus. We describe an automatic system for semantic role tagging trained on the corpus and discuss the effect on its performance of various types of information, including a comparison of full syntactic parsing with a flat representation and the contribution of the empty “trace” categories of the treebank.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Building a Large Annotated Corpus of English: The Penn Treebank
Marcus, M. (1993) · doi:10.21236/ada273556 · Cited by 7,405
Cited by
Deep Contextualized Word Representations
Peters, M., Neumann, M., Iyyer, M., Gardner, M., Clark, C., Lee, K., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1202 · Cited by 11,983
A unified architecture for natural language processing: deep neural networks with multitask learning
Collobert, R., & Weston, J. (2008) · Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning - ICML '08 · doi:10.1145/1390156.1390177 · Cited by 5,058
Natural Language Processing (almost) from Scratch
Collobert, R., Weston, J., Bottou, L., Karlen, M., Kavukcuoglu, K., & Kuksa, P. P. (2011) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1103.0398 · Cited by 4,962
Cheap and fast---but is it good?: evaluating non-expert annotations for natural language tasks
Snow, R., O'Connor, B., Jurafsky, D., & Ng, A. Y. (2008) · Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing - EMNLP '08 · doi:10.3115/1613715.1613751 · Cited by 1,887
Natural language processing: state of the art, current trends and challenges
Khurana, D., Koli, A., Khatter, K., & Singh, S. (2023) · Multimedia Tools and Applications · doi:10.1007/s11042-022-13428-4 · Cited by 1,823
Metadata
- Authors
- Palmer, M., Gildea, D., & Kingsbury, P.
- Venue
- Computational Linguistics
- Publisher
- MIT Press
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 71-106
- ISSN
- 0891-2017 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-9312
- OpenAlex
- W2158847908
- Cited by
- 2,273
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 104.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Proposition Bank: An Annotated Corpus of Semantic Roles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/0891201053630264
- The paper
- Palmer, M., Gildea, D., & Kingsbury, P. (2005). The Proposition Bank: An Annotated Corpus of Semantic Roles. Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1162/0891201053630264
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
