REVIEW 2 cited by
Semantic Ambiguity and Perceived Ambiguity
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
read the original abstract
I explore some of the issues that arise when trying to establish a connection between the underspecification hypothesis pursued in the NLP literature and work on ambiguity in semantics and in the psychological literature. A theory of underspecification is developed `from the first principles', i.e., starting from a definition of what it means for a sentence to be semantically ambiguous and from what we know about the way humans deal with ambiguity. An underspecified language is specified as the translation language of a grammar covering sentences that display three classes of semantic ambiguity: lexical ambiguity, scopal ambiguity, and referential ambiguity. The expressions of this language denote sets of senses. A formalization of defeasible reasoning with underspecified representations is presented, based on Default Logic. Some issues to be confronted by such a formalization are discussed.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
3D Instruction Ambiguity Detection
Defines 3D Instruction Ambiguity Detection as a new task, releases the Ambi3D benchmark, shows state-of-the-art 3D LLMs struggle with it, and proposes the AmbiVer framework that gathers multi-view visual evidence to g...
-
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). Sign in to comment.