REVIEW 2 cited by
A Taxonomy of Ambiguity Types for NLP
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Ambiguity is an critical component of language that allows for more effective communication between speakers, but is often ignored in NLP. Recent work suggests that NLP systems may struggle to grasp certain elements of human language understanding because they may not handle ambiguities at the level that humans naturally do in communication. Additionally, different types of ambiguity may serve different purposes and require different approaches for resolution, and we aim to investigate how language models' abilities vary across types. We propose a taxonomy of ambiguity types as seen in English to facilitate NLP analysis. Our taxonomy can help make meaningful splits in language ambiguity data, allowing for more fine-grained assessments of both datasets and model performance.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
From Disagreement to Understanding: The Case for Ambiguity Detection in NLI
The paper argues that NLI models should detect and classify content-based ambiguity before inference, treating disagreement as signal rather than noise.
-
Position: Natural Language Should Not Fully Replace Formal Languages
A 'specificity crossover' threshold, defined from information theory, marks where natural-language prompts lose efficiency to formal specification, supporting hybrid human-AI interfaces.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.