Cited by 841Natural Language Processing TechniquesComputational and Text Analysis MethodsComputational Physics and Python Applications

NLTK: The Natural Language Toolkit

Open access
Bird, Steven·2006·Proceedings of the COLING/ACL on Interactive presentation sessions -

Abstract

The Natural Language Toolkit is a suite of program modules, data sets and tutorials supporting research and teaching in computational linguistics and natural language processing. NLTK is written in Python and distributed under the GPL open source license. Over the past year the toolkit has been rewritten, simplifying many linguistic data structures and taking advantage of recent enhancements in the Python language. This paper reports on the simplified toolkit and explains how it is used in teaching NLP.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3115/1225403.1225421

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Marti Hearst. 2005. Teaching applied natural language processing: Triumphs and tribulations. In Proc 2nd ACL Workshop on Effective Tools and Methodolo- gies for Teaching NLP and CL, pages 1-8, ACL
  2. Elizabeth Liddy and Nancy McCracken. 2005. Hands- on NLP for an interdisciplinary audience. In Proc 2nd ACL Workshop on Effective Tools and Method- ologies for Teaching NLP and CL, pages 62-68, ACL
  3. Edward Loper and Steven Bird. 2002. NLTK: The Natural Language Toolkit. In Proc ACL Workshop on Effective Tools and Methodologies for Teaching Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics, pages 62-69. ACL.
  4. David Beasley. 2006. Python Essential Reference, 3rd Edition. Sams.
  5. Rune Sætre, Amund Tveit, Tonje S. Steigedal, and Astrid Lægreid. 2005. Semantic annotation of biomedical literature using Google. In Data Min- ing and Bioinformatics Workshop, volume 3482 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bird, S.
Affiliations
The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Bird, Steven
Venue
Proceedings of the COLING/ACL on Interactive presentation sessions -
Published
2006
Pages
69-72
OpenAlex
W4251372957
Cited by
841
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 85 · 2024: 98 · 2023: 88 · 2022: 71 · 2021: 83 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 85 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.47
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International Conference on Computational Linguistics and Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING/ACL) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Computational Physics and Python Applications
Keywords
NLTK, natural language processing, computational linguistics, Python, open source software

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