Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 2 cited by

K-UD: Revising Korean Universal Dependencies Guidelines

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that Korean Universal Dependencies guidelines should be revised so that the last noun heads noun compounds and proper-name chains, that oblique complements are labeled obl:arg via Sejong frame information, and that…

desk verdict A concrete, clearly written proposal for revising Korean UD guidelines, but the head-last rule is asserted rather than argued and the validation is missing, so the revisions are not yet proven better. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.00856 v1 pith:4SBCASRQ submitted 2024-12-01 cs.CL

Kyuwon Kim , Yige Chen , Eunkyul Leah Jo , KyungTae Lim , Jungyeul Park , Chulwoo Park This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CL
keywords KoreanUniversalDependenciesdependencytreebankannotationnouncompoundheadobl:argsubcategorizationframeSejongcatenativeconstructionclausalpassivesubject
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proposes a set of revisions to the Korean Universal Dependencies (UD) annotation guidelines, targeting syntactic relations rather than POS tags. It argues that the current Korean treebanks systematically misannotate four construction types: noun compounds and multiword proper names (where the first noun is wrongly treated as head), auxiliary-versus-catenative verb constructions (where the first verb is always head), postpositional arguments (all labeled obl), and topic-marked subjects (labeled dislocated rather than nsubj). The proposed changes make the last noun the head, introduce obl:arg for arguments supported by Sejong dictionary subcategorization frames, add dislocated:nsubj and csubj:pass, and distinguish aux from xcomp. If adopted, these guidelines would require re-annotating the existing Korean GSD, Kaist, and Penn treebanks and would change the data used to train and evaluate Korean dependency parsers. The paper manually annotates 200 Sejong sentences as a first validation of the revised scheme.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is a head-selection rule plus a frame-based argument test. The head-selection rule states that the semantic head of a noun compound is the stem that determines the semantic category, usually the last noun in Korean, and that the last proper noun is chosen as the head of flat structures because it receives case from the predicate. The argument test consults the Sejong dictionary's subcategorization frames: if a predicate's frame lists a specific postposition phrase as an argument, the dependency is obl:arg; otherwise it is obl. These two devices jointly drive the new relations obl:arg, dislocated:nsubj, and csubj:pass, and distinguish aux from xcomp in catenative constructions.

What would settle it

Annotate every noun compound in the Korean_GSD treebank for whether the last noun determines the semantic category; if even a handful of compounds are left-headed or exocentric (the category matches the first noun or neither noun alone), then the blanket last-noun rule is falsified and must be relaxed into per-construction or per-item decisions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that current Korean UD annotations follow a first-word convention that is wrong for Korean: in noun compounds such as jangdonggeon sajin-eul ('Jang Dong-gun picture'), the head is the last noun sajin ('picture'), which receives the accusative case from the predicate; in catenative constructions like bogo sipda ('see want'), the lexical head is the catenative verb sipda ('want'), not the preceding verb; adverbial postposition phrases that are complements of the predicate, e.g., jutaegsijang-e in jutaegsijang-e johda ('good for the housing market'), should be obl:arg rather than plain obl; and topicalized nominals such as kokkili-neun ('elephant.top') in double-subject sentences are subjects rather than generic dislocated elements, hence dislocated:nsubj. The revision also adds csubj:pass for clausal passive subjects, exemplified by ttwieonan dunoeim-i jeungmyeongdwaessda ('being an outstanding brain was proven'). Under the revised scheme, the head of an MWE or compound is the last word for flat and compound relations, and Sejong dictionary subcategorization frames are the authority for deciding which postpositional phrases count as arguments.

Load-bearing premise

The revision rests on the premise that the last noun in a Korean noun compound is always the semantic head and that the Sejong dictionary's subcategorization frames are the right authority for whether a postpositional phrase is an argument; if either gives way, the new relations would misannotate rather than improve the treebank.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the last-noun head rule is correct, the existing Korean_GSD treebank misannotates every compound noun and multiword proper name whose head is not the first word, requiring bulk re-annotation.
  • Adopting obl:arg would change the counts of core versus non-core arguments in Korean treebanks, affecting parser evaluation and cross-lingual comparisons.
  • Using Sejong dictionary frames as the authority for argumenthood ties the UD annotations to a specific Korean lexical resource, so the revised treebank inherits that resource's coverage and decisions.
  • Adding csubj:pass and dislocated:nsubj to the relation inventory would make Korean treebanks more descriptively adequate for double-subject and passive clausal constructions.
  • The 200-sentence manual annotation demonstrates that the revised guidelines are applicable to unseen Sejong sentences, supporting the feasibility of full treebank conversion.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the same last-word-headedness logic is used for flat and compound relations, the proposal implicitly predicts that right-headedness holds across all Korean MWEs, including dates and names; a left-headed or exocentric counterexample would force a more per-construction rule.
  • The Sejong-frame test could be operationalized automatically: if frame information is available for all predicates in a treebank, the obl/obl:arg decision becomes lexically driven rather than annotation-dependent, which would improve annotation consistency but also make treebank quality sensitive to frame dictionary coverage.
  • If the revised guidelines were applied to Kaist and Penn as well, the three Korean UD treebanks would diverge less from the Sejong/KLUE dependency structure, easing the stated goal of a consensus model; this is a direction the paper says it is working toward but has not yet completed.
  • A testable extension would be inter-annotator agreement on a random sample of noun compounds; if agreement on the last-noun head is high, the rule is robust, and if not, the guideline needs exception classes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a set of revisions to the Korean Universal Dependencies (UD) guidelines, motivated by perceived inadequacies in the current Korean UD treebanks. The core proposals include annotating the last noun rather than the first noun as the head of noun compounds and multiword proper names, introducing the relation obl:arg for oblique arguments determined by Sejong dictionary subcategorization frames, adding dislocated:nsubj for topicalized nominals, and adding csubj:pass for clausal passive subjects. The paper also discusses annotation conventions for auxiliary verbs, copulas, and markers. To validate the revisions, the authors describe manually annotating 200 sentences from the Sejong project, but they do not report any quantitative results, agreement metrics, or comparisons with existing annotations. The paper concludes with plans to integrate the revised guidelines into UD documentation.

Significance. If the proposed revisions are linguistically sound and empirically validated, they could lead to more accurate Korean UD treebanks and better alignment with Sejong-style dependency annotation, potentially improving Korean dependency parsing and cross-linguistic comparability. The paper correctly identifies genuine weaknesses in the current Korean UD annotation, such as the treatment of noun-phrase heads and auxiliary verb constructions, and it offers concrete proposals for new relations (obl:arg, dislocated:nsubj, csubj:pass) that may be useful to the community. However, the paper offers no empirical evidence that the revised guidelines 'better capture Korean syntax' as claimed, and the manual annotation described in Section 4.1 is not analyzed or released. The significance is therefore conditional: the proposal is interesting, but the central claim of improvement is unsupported in the present version.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.1] The head-last rule for noun compounds and multiword proper names is asserted without supporting evidence or discussion of competing analyses. The paper states that 'the head is typically the stem that determines the semantic category, usually the last noun in Korean,' but it then applies the rule unconditionally, without addressing left-headed, exocentric, or headless compounds. The justification for proper names—'the last proper noun would receive the case from the predicate'—is circular, because Korean case markers attach to the surface-final element of the whole noun phrase, which is a consequence of the annotation decision rather than an independent fact about headedness. This rule is load-bearing: the proposed compound and flat annotations, and the argument relations assigned to their dependents, all depend on it. The paper should either provide principled evidence for categorical head-last status in Korean compounds or restrict the rule to cases where it can be independently justified.
  2. [Section 4.1] The 200-sentence manual annotation study is described but never evaluated. The paper reports that the sentences were 'randomly selected from the Sejong project' and annotated according to the revised guidelines, but it gives no results: there are no inter-annotator agreement scores, no comparison with existing UD annotations or Sejong-style annotations, no error analysis, and no release of the annotated data. Consequently, the central claim that the revised guidelines 'better capture Korean syntax' is not supported by the evidence presented. To support the claim, the authors need to report quantitative measures of annotation validity and reliability, or explicitly reframe the contribution as a preliminary guideline proposal without an empirical validation claim.
  3. [Section 3.3] The use of Sejong dictionary subcategorization frames as the authority for distinguishing obl:arg from obl is not sufficiently specified. The paper relies on frames such as 'X=N0-i Y=N1-e|ege johda' to decide whether a postpositional phrase is an argument, but it does not describe the source edition of the Sejong dictionary, the selection criteria for frames, how frames are matched to predicates in actual sentences, or how cases not covered by the dictionary are handled. Without these details, the proposed obl:arg and dislocated:nsubj annotations are not reproducible, and the claim that the revised guidelines improve upon the current 'annotate everything as obl' practice cannot be assessed.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Section 3.4] The example '싸움 ’ 이라는' includes a cop annotation, but it is not clear how the copular marker '-i' is tokenized when it is separated from the preceding lexeme; please clarify the tokenization rule.
  2. [Figure 1] Figure 1 is difficult to read: the two annotation layers ('top' and 'bottom') are indicated solely by the position of the arrows, and the relations are not clearly distinguished. A side-by-side or color-coded layout would improve clarity.
  3. [Section 3.2] The term 'catenative construction' is used without definition or a reference; please define it and explain how it differs from auxiliary and complement constructions in Korean, since the distinction is central to the proposed xcomp and aux annotations.
  4. [Section 4.1] The paper refers to the 'Sejong dictionary' and the 'Sejong project' but does not cite a specific edition or corpus; please provide a reference to the exact resource used for the subcategorization frames and for the 200-sentence sample.
  5. [Section 4.1] The description of the random selection of 200 sentences is underspecified; please state the source corpus, the sampling procedure, and whether the selections were stratified or simply a convenience sample.
  6. [Section 4.2] The claim that Korean is an 'end-focus language' and that the Sejong-style dependency structure 'consistently adheres to a right-to-left pattern' is asserted without quantitative support or a citation; please provide evidence or temper the claim.
  7. [Conclusion] The conclusion mentions aligning with the KLUE benchmark consortium and the National Institute of Korean Language, but no details or letters of support are provided; either elaborate on these collaborations or omit them as unverifiable.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The proper-name head rule is a restatement of case-marker position, and the 200-sentence validation annotates with the very guidelines under test, so the revisions are only partially supported.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.1 (Core arguments: nominals)]
    "Even in the case of multiword proper names, especially in many languages with no clear internal syntactic structure, where the first proper noun is generally considered as the head, we annotate a last proper noun as the head in Korean. This choice is made because the last proper noun would receive the case from the predicate."

    The paper first defines a head semantically as 'the stem that determines the semantic category', but for proper names it drops that criterion and instead equates the head with the token that receives case from the predicate. Because Korean case particles attach to the surface-final element of the entire noun phrase, observing that the last proper noun carries the case marker is not an independent test of headedness; it is the same fact restated as a rule. Thus the proposed flat/compound head choices for multiword proper names reduce, by definition, to the linear position of the case marker rather than to any independent syntactic evidence.

  2. other [Section 4.1 (Annotating new sentences)]
    "We randomly selected 200 sentences from the Sejong project and manually annotated them using the revised UD guidelines to validate the revisions."

    The stated validation procedure applies the very guidelines whose correctness it is meant to establish. No independent gold standard, no inter-annotator agreement, no comparison with the existing UD or Sejong annotations, and no quantitative results are reported. If the annotators follow the revised guidelines, the resulting annotations will naturally conform to those guidelines, so the procedure can only show that the rules are applicable, not that the rules are linguistically valid. The validation claim is therefore circular by construction.

full rationale

The paper's core proposal is a set of revised dependency labels, and two load-bearing parts of that proposal exhibit construction-level circularity. First, the rule that the last proper noun is the head of a multiword name is justified only by the fact that the last token receives the case marker; since case markers attach to the phrase-final token independently of headedness, this turns the case-marker position into the definition of headedness for proper names, and the compound/flat revisions built on that rule inherit the circularity. Second, the 200-sentence 'validation' in Section 4.1 is performed by manually annotating sentences with the revised guidelines that are being validated, with no independent adjudication, so agreement is assured by the annotation instructions rather than by evidence. The paper is not wholly circular: the obl:arg decisions are grounded in external Sejong dictionary subcategorization frames, and the csubj:pass and aux/catenative distinctions are substantive proposals independent of the circular steps. Self-citations to Chen et al. (2022) and Jo et al. (2023) are used for background and error statistics and are not load-bearing. Overall, the central head rule and the validation claim are partially circular, while other revisions retain independent content, yielding a score of 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central proposal rests on the unargued claim that the last noun in Korean compounds is the semantic head, plus reliance on Sejong dictionary frames for argumenthood. No numerical free parameters are fitted; the paper is qualitative. The three new annotation relations are introduced without external falsifiable evidence, so they are counted as invented entities with no independent support.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Universal Dependencies framework is an appropriate annotation standard for Korean.
    The paper works entirely within UD and proposes modifications rather than rejecting the framework. Invoked throughout.
  • domain assumption Sejong dictionary subcategorization frames reliably determine which postpositional phrases are arguments of a predicate.
    Used in Section 3.3 and 4.1 to justify the obl:arg relation, e.g., the frame for johda ('good') defines a goal argument.
  • ad hoc to paper In Korean noun compounds, the last noun is the semantic head.
    Asserted without citation or supporting literature in Section 3.1. This premise is load-bearing for the flat and compound revisions.
  • ad hoc to paper Manual annotation by the proposing authors constitutes sufficient validation.
    Section 4.1 treats the annotation of 200 sentences as validation without reporting inter-annotator agreement, external adjudication, or comparison with current annotations.
invented entities (3)
  • obl:arg
    purpose: Mark postpositional phrases that are arguments rather than adjuncts.
    Introduced in Section 3.3 and justified by Sejong dictionary frames, but there is no external validation that the label improves annotation consistency or parsing performance.
  • dislocated:nsubj
    purpose: Treat topicalized nominals in double-subject constructions as subjects rather than as dislocated elements.
    Proposed in Section 3.3; the paper asserts that such nominals 'should be considered as subjects' but provides no external evidence for this classification.
  • csubj:pass
    purpose: Represent clausal passive subjects.
    Proposed in Section 3.2 as an extension of nsubj:pass; no validation or external support is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of K-UD: Revising Korean Universal Dependencies Guidelines." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4SBCASRQ

@misc{pith2026241200856,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: K-UD: Revising Korean Universal Dependencies Guidelines},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4SBCASRQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.00856}
}
read the original abstract

Critique has surfaced concerning the existing linguistic annotation framework for Korean Universal Dependencies (UDs), particularly in relation to syntactic relationships. In this paper, our primary objective is to refine the definition of syntactic dependency of UDs within the context of analyzing the Korean language. Our aim is not only to achieve a consensus within UDs but also to garner agreement beyond the UD framework for analyzing Korean sentences using dependency structure, by establishing a linguistic consensus model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.00856 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example of the current annotation in Korean_GSD The current Korean GSD dataset also exhibits morphological annotation errors, for example, with an average of 2.46 words per sentence for language￾specific XPOS and 2.35 words per sentence for Uni￾versal POS, as reported in Jo et al. (2023). In this paper, we focus on revising the definition of syn￾tactic dependency with an attempt to establish the linguistic consensus… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Annotating Korean adnominal ending constructions in corpus data: Beyond relative-clause identification

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    ETM is a shared morphological exponent of multiple adnominal constructions; relative-clause-like uses are only 39.4% of KLUE training instances and cannot be identified from the ending alone.

  2. Constituency Structure over Eojeol in Korean Treebanks

    cs.CL 2025-12 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Korean constituency trees should use eojeol—not morphemes—as terminals, with morphology in a separate layer; normalizations can make Sejong, Penn, and KAIST comparable on that backbone.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Tyers, and Jungyeul Park

    Yige Chen, Eunkyul Leah Jo, Yundong Yao, KyungTae Lim, Miikka Silfverberg, Francis M. Tyers, and Jungyeul Park. 2022. https://aclanthology.org/2022.coling-1.482 Yet Another Format of Universal Dependencies for Korean . In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pages 5432--5437, Gyeongju, Republic of Korea. Internati...

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Choi and Martha Palmer

    Jinho D. Choi and Martha Palmer. 2011. http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W11-3801 Statistical Dependency Parsing in Korean: From Corpus Generation To Automatic Parsing . In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically Rich Languages, pages 1--11, Dublin, Ireland. Association for Computational Linguistics

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Han, Young G

    Key-Sun Choi, Young S. Han, Young G. Han, and Oh W. Kwon. 1994. KAIST Tree Bank Project for Korean: Present and Future Development . In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Sharable Natural Language Resources, pages 7--14, Nara Institute of Science and Technology. Nara Institute of Science and Technology

    work page 1994

  4. [4]

    Hwang, and Jinho D

    Jayeol Chun, Na-Rae Han, Jena D. Hwang, and Jinho D. Choi. 2018. Building Universal Dependency Treebanks in Korean . In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018), Miyazaki, Japan. European Language Resources Association (ELRA)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Timothy Dozat, Natalia Silveira, Katri Haverinen, Filip Ginter, Joakim Nivre, and Christopher D. Manning. 2014. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2014/pdf/1062_Paper.pdf Universal Stanford dependencies: A cross-linguistic typology . In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluatio...

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Chung-Hye Han, Na-Rae Han, Eon-Suk Ko, Martha Palmer, and Heejong Yi. 2002. Penn Korean Treebank: Development and Evaluation . In Proceedings of the 16th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, pages 69--78, Jeju, Korea. Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation

    2002

  7. [7]

    Eunkyul Jo, Kyuwon Kim, Xihan Wu, KyungTae Lim, Jungyeul Park, and Chulwoo Park. 2023. https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-acl.414 K-UniMorph: Korean Universal Morphology and its Feature Schema . In Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL 2023, pages 6613--6623, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Hiroshi Kanayama, Youngja Park, Yuta Tsuboi, and Dongmook Yi. 2014. https://doi.org/10.3115/v1/W14-4202 Learning from a Neighbor: Adapting a Japanese Parser for Korean Through Feature Transfer Learning . In Proceedings of the EMNLP'2014 Workshop on Language Technology for Closely Related Languages and Language Variants, pages 2--12, Doha, Qatar. Associati...

    work page doi:10.3115/v1/w14-4202 2014

Show all 21 references
  1. [9]

    a ckstr \

    Ryan McDonald, Joakim Nivre, Yvonne Quirmbach-Brundage, Yoav Goldberg, Dipanjan Das, Kuzman Ganchev, Keith Hall, Slav Petrov, Hao Zhang, Oscar T \" a ckstr \" o m, Claudia Bedini, Núria Bertomeu Castell \' o , and Jungmee Lee. 2013. https://aclanthology.org/P13-2017 Universal ...

    2013

  2. [10]

    Manning, Ryan McDonald, Slav Petrov, Sampo Pyysalo, Natalia Silveira, Reut Tsarfaty, and Daniel Zeman

    Joakim Nivre, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Filip Ginter, Yoav Goldberg, Jan Hajic, Christopher D. Manning, Ryan McDonald, Slav Petrov, Sampo Pyysalo, Natalia Silveira, Reut Tsarfaty, and Daniel Zeman. 2016. https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/L16-1262 In Proceedings of the Tenth ...

    2016

  3. [11]

    Manning, Sampo Pyysalo, Sebastian Schuster, Francis Tyers, and Daniel Zeman

    Joakim Nivre, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Filip Ginter, Jan Haji c , Christopher D. Manning, Sampo Pyysalo, Sebastian Schuster, Francis Tyers, and Daniel Zeman. 2020. https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.lrec-1.497 Universal Dependencies v2: An Evergrowing Multilingual Treeb...

    2020

  4. [12]

    Youngbin Noh, Jiyoon Han, Tae Hwan Oh, and Hansaem Kim. 2018. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W18-6013 Enhancing Universal Dependencies for Korean . In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW 2018), pages 108--116, Brussels, Belgium. Association for Compu...

    2018 doi

  5. [13]

    Jin-Young Oh and Jeong-Won Cha. 2013. Korean Dependency Parsing using Key Eojoel . Journal of KIISE:Software and Applications, 40(10):600--608

    2013

  6. [14]

    Jungyeul Park, Daisuke Kawahara, Sadao Kurohashi, and Key-Sun Choi. 2013. https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W13-5714 Towards Fully Lexicalized Dependency Parsing for Korean . In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Parsing Technologies (IWPT 2013), pages 120--126...

    2013

  7. [15]

    Sungjoon Park, Jihyung Moon, Sungdong Kim, Won Ik Cho, Ji Yoon Han, Jangwon Park, Chisung Song, Junseong Kim, Youngsook Song, Taehwan Oh, Joohong Lee, Juhyun Oh, Sungwon Lyu, Younghoon Jeong, Inkwon Lee, Sangwoo Seo, Dongjun Lee, Hyunwoo Kim, Myeonghwa Lee, Seongbo Jang, Seung...

    2021

  8. [16]

    Djamé Seddah, Sandra K \" u bler, and Reut Tsarfaty. 2014. https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W14-6111 Introducing the SPMRL 2014 Shared Task on Parsing Morphologically-rich Languages . In Proceedings of the First Joint Workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically Rich Lan...

    2014

  9. [17]

    Djamé Seddah, Reut Tsarfaty, Sandra K \" u bler, Marie Candito, Jinho D. Choi, Richárd Farkas, Jennifer Foster, Iakes Goenaga, Koldo Gojenola Galletebeitia, Yoav Goldberg, Spence Green, Nizar Habash, Marco Kuhlmann, Wolfgang Maier, Joakim Nivre, Adam Przepi \' o rkowski, Ryan ...

    2013

  10. [18]

    Daniel Zeman, Jan Haji c , Martin Popel, Martin Potthast, Milan Straka, Filip Ginter, Joakim Nivre, and Slav Petrov. 2018. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/K18-2001 CoNLL 2018 Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies . In Proceedings of the CoNLL 20...

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    Daniel Zeman, Martin Popel, Milan Straka, Jan Haji c , Joakim Nivre, Filip Ginter, Juhani Luotolahti, Sampo Pyysalo, Slav Petrov, Martin Potthast, Francis Tyers, Elena Badmaeva, Memduh Gokirmak, Anna Nedoluzhko, Silvie Cinkov \' a , Jan Haji c Jr., Jaroslava Hlav \' a c ov \' ...

    2017

  12. [20]

    URL: " 'urlintro :=

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year eprint doi pubmed url lastchecked label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before...

  13. [21]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.