Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Logic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationNatural Language Processing Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Some uses of higher-order logic in computational linguistics

Open access
Miller, Dale A., Nadathur, Gopalan·1986·Proceedings of the 24th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics -
DOI 10.3115/981131.981165
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Consideration of the question of meaning in the framework of linguistics often requires an allusion to sets and other higher-order notions. The traditional approach to representing and reasoning about meaning in a computational setting has been to use knowledge representation systems that are either based on first-order logic or that use mechanisms whose formal justifications are to be provided after the fact. In this paper we shall consider the use of a higher-order logic for this task. We first present a version of definite clauses (positive Horn clauses) that is based on this logic. Predicate and function variables may occur in such clauses and the terms in the language are the typed λ-terms. Such term structures have a richness that may be exploited in representing meanings. We also describe a higher-order logic programming language, called λProlog, which represents programs as higher-order definite clauses and interprets them using a depth-first interpreter. A virtue of this language is that it is possible to write programs in it that integrate syntactic and semantic analyses into one computational paradigm. This is to be contrasted with the more common practice of using two entirely different computation paradigms, such as DCGs or ATNs for parsing and frames or semantic nets for semantic processing. We illustrate such an integration in this language by considering a simple example, and we claim that its use makes the task of providing formal justifications for the computations specified much more direct.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3115/981131.981165

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

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

Show all 14 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Ronald J. Brachman, James G. Schmolze, "An Over- view of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation Sys- tem," Cognitive Science 9 (1985), 171 -216.
  2. Michael J. Gordon, Arthur J. Milner, Christopher P. Wadsworth, Edinburgh LCF, Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Computer Science No. 78, 1979.

Cited by

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Miller, D. A., & Nadathur, G.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the 24th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics -
Publisher
Association for Computational Linguistics
Published
1986
Pages
247-256
ISSN
0736-587X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3115/981131.981165
OpenAlex
W2119749753
Cited by
58
References
14
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.49
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting (publishedVersion)
  • OLAC - Open Language Archives Community (submittedVersion)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
higher-order logic, meaning representation, definite clauses, Horn clauses, lambda calculus, λProlog, higher-order logic programming, knowledge representation, formal semantics

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

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.