Cited by 39Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismNatural Language Processing Techniques

On the structural complexity of natural language sentences

Open access
Lin, Dekang·1996·Proceedings of the 16th conference on Computational linguistics -

Abstract

The objective of this pal)er is to [brmalize the intuition al)out l,he comph;xity of syntactic structures.We propose a definition of structm:al COml)h'xity such that sentences ranked by our definition as more COml)h;x are gen(;rally more diI'ficult lbr humans to process.We justify the definition by showing how it is ahle to account for several seemingly unrelated phenomena in natural languages.

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 · 10.3115/993268.993295

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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 MMSE, ACE, and MoCA are related screenings for conditions such as MCI, dementia, and Alzheimer's disease.

    “Related screenings include the mini-mental state examination (MMSE) [57], Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination (ACE) [58], and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) [59] for evaluating conditions like mild cognitive impairment (MCI), dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease (AD).”

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. E. Bach, C. l{rown, an<[ W. Marslen-Wilson. 1986. (5 ossed and nested d(;pemlencies in (,e~- ma.n and I)utch: A psycholinguistic, stmdy. Lan- guage and Cognilive l>rocesscs, 1(4):249 262. "

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lin, D.
Affiliations
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Lin, Dekang
Venue
Proceedings of the 16th conference on Computational linguistics -
Published
1996
Volume
2
Pages
729
ISSN
1525-2477 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1972620750
Cited by
39
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.37
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International Conference on Computational Linguistics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
Keywords
structural complexity, syntactic structure, natural language sentences, complexity measures, syntactic analysis

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