The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Domain adaptation with structural correspondence learning
Open accessAbstract
Discriminative learning methods are widely used in natural language processing. These methods work best when their training and test data are drawn from the same distribution. For many NLP tasks, however, we are confronted with new domains in which labeled data is scarce or non-existent. In such cases, we seek to adapt existing models from a resource-rich source domain to a resource-poor target domain. We introduce structural correspondence learning to automatically induce correspondences among features from different domains. We test our technique on part of speech tagging and show performance gains for varying amounts of source and target training data, as well as improvements in target domain parsing accuracy using our improved tagger.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This test is appropriate for binary classification tasks, and has been indeed used in such NLP works (e.g.sentiment classificaiton, (Blitzer et al., 2006;Ziser and Reichart, 2017)).”
From The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Testing Statistical Significance in Natural Language Processing (2018) · cites this paper as Blitzer et al., 2006
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
(2003) · Journal of Machine Learning Research · doi:10.5555/944919.944937 · Cited by 32,337
Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2002) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1120.003.0082 · Cited by 12,683
Building a Large Annotated Corpus of English: The Penn Treebank
Marcus, M. (1993) · doi:10.21236/ada273556 · Cited by 7,405
Combining labeled and unlabeled data with co-training
Blum, A. L., & Mitchell, T. M. (1998) · Conference on Learning Theory · doi:10.1145/279943.279962 · Cited by 5,597
Feature-rich part-of-speech tagging with a cyclic dependency network
Toutanova, K., Klein, D., Manning, C. D., & Singer, Y. (2003) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.3115/1073445.1073478 · Cited by 2,921
(1992) · doi:10.5555/176313.176316 · Cited by 2,892
Minimum error rate training in statistical machine translation
Och, F. J. (2003) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.3115/1075096.1075117 · Cited by 2,728
Online Passive-Aggressive Algorithms
Crammer, K., Dekel, O., Keshet, J., Shalev‐Shwartz, S., & Singer, Y. (2003) · Cited by 1,682
A Maximum Entropy Model for Part-Of-Speech Tagging
Ratnaparkhi, A. (1996) · Cited by 1,328
A Framework for Learning Predictive Structures from Multiple Tasks and Unlabeled Data
Ando, R. K., & Zhang, T. (2005) · doi:10.5555/1046920.1194905 · Cited by 1,319
Shallow parsing with conditional random fields
Sha, F., & Pereira, F. (2003) · Proceedings of the 2003 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Human Language Technology - NAACL '03 · doi:10.3115/1073445.1073473 · Cited by 1,246
Self-citationDistributional clustering of English words
Pereira, F., Tishby, N., & Lee, L. (1993) · Proceedings of the 31st annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics - · doi:10.3115/981574.981598 · Cited by 974
Self-citationOnline Passive-Aggressive Algorithms
CrammerKoby, DekelOfer, KeshetJoseph, Shalev-ShwartzShai, & SingerYoram (2006) · Journal of Machine Learning Research · doi:10.5555/1248547.1248566 · Cited by 915
Domain Adaptation for Statistical Classifiers
Daume III, H., & Marcu, D. (2006) · Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research · doi:10.1613/jair.1872 · Cited by 816
Online large-margin training of dependency parsers
McDonald, R., Crammer, K., & Pereira, F. M. B. (2005) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.3115/1219840.1219852 · Cited by 795
Self-citationSome statistical issues in the comparison of speech recognition algorithms
Gillick, L., & Cox, S. J. (2003) · International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/icassp.1989.266481 · Cited by 636
Name Tagging with Word Clusters and Discriminative Training
Miller, S. L., Guinness, J., & Zamanian, A. (2004) · Cited by 266
A high-performance semi-supervised learning method for text chunking
Ando, R. K., & Zhang, T. (2005) · Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) · doi:10.3115/1219840.1219841 · Cited by 224
Adaptation of maximum entropy capitalizer: Little data can help a lot
Chelba, C. I., & Acero, A. (2005) · Computer Speech & Language · doi:10.1016/j.csl.2005.05.005 · Cited by 184
A Statistical Model for Multilingual Entity Detection and Tracking
Florian, R., Hassan, H., Ittycheriah, A. P., Jing, H., Kambhatla, N., Luo, X., Nicolov, H., & Roukos, S. (2004) · Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) · doi:10.21236/ada460245 · Cited by 182
Eigenvoices for speaker adaptation
Kühn, R., Nguyen, P., Junqua, J.-C., Goldwasser, L., Niedzielski, N. A., Fincke, S., Field, K. L., & Contolini, M. (1998) · International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP) · doi:10.21437/icslp.1998-740 · Cited by 145
Discriminative language modeling with conditional random fields and the perceptron algorithm
Brian Roark, A., Saraçlar, M., Collins, M., & Johnson, M. (2004) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.3115/1218955.1218962 · Cited by 142
Lease, M., & Eugene Charniak, D. (2005) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/11562214_6 · Cited by 120
Adaptation of Maximum Entropy Capitalizer: Little Data Can Help a Lo.
Chelba, C. I., & Acero, A. (2004) · Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · Cited by 105
Supervised and unsupervised PCFG adaptation to novel domains
Roark, B., & Bacchiani, M. (2003) · doi:10.3115/1073445.1073472 · Cited by 94
Flexible text segmentation with structured multilabel classification
McDonald, R., Crammer, K., & Pereira, F. M. B. (2005) · doi:10.3115/1220575.1220699 · Cited by 93
Self-citationExploiting unannotated corpora for tagging and chunking
Ando, R. K. (2004) · doi:10.3115/1219044.1219057 · Cited by 18
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 28 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- K. Crammer, Dekel O, J. Keshet, S. Shalev-Shwartz, and Y. Singer. 2006. Online passive-aggressive al- gorithms. JMLR, 7:551-585.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1810.04805 · Cited by 73,173
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1423 · Cited by 54,325
Pan, S. J., & Yang, Q. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering · doi:10.1109/tkde.2009.191 · Cited by 23,387
Comprehensive Integration of Single-Cell Data
Stuart, T., Butler, A., Hoffman, P., Hafemeister, C., Papalexi, E., Mauck, W. M., Hao, Y., Stoeckius, M., Smibert, P., & Satija, R. (2019) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.05.031 · Cited by 15,453
Domain-Adversarial Training of Neural Networks
Ganin, Y., Ustinova, E., Ajakan, H., Germain, P., Larochelle, H., Laviolette, F., Marchand, M., & Lempitsky, V. (2017) · Advances in Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-58347-1_10 · Cited by 8,318
Metadata
- Authors
- Blitzer, J., McDonald, R., & Pereira, F.
- Affiliations
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- ORCID
- Pereira, Fernando
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing - EMNLP '06
- Published
- 2006
- Pages
- 120
- OpenAlex
- W2158108973
- Cited by
- 1,543
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 67 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 104 · 2020: 165 · 2019: 123 · 2018: 123 · 2017: 116 · 2016: 99 · 2015: 124 · 2014: 95 · 2013: 86 · 2012: 82
- FWCI
- 19.17
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (0205448)
- Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
- Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (NBCHD-03-0010)
- Advanced Research Projects Agency
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- domain adaptation, part-of-speech tagging, discriminative learning, natural language processing, dependency parsing
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
