Note on Workshop on FP7 eGovernance and Policy Modelling Projects

On January 27th, 2012, I attended a workshop in Sheffield, United Kingdom on current FP7 eGovernance and Policy Modelling projects. This was an opportunity to hear from and meet participants in other projects, largely based in the United Kingdom. The information (somewhat augmented) about the workshop is below. My colleagues in the IMPACT Project, Professor Ann Macintosh and Neil Benn, presented our side of the story.
Aims

  • To close the gap between the availability of cutting edge R & D in eGovernance and Policy Modelling and its take-up in local and central government. It will bring the new governance projects and those about to exploit their results into a collaborative environment.
  • To link the projects currently creating the best practice of the future with initiatives seeking to share current best practice, thus assisting with “exploitation” of the new initiatives.
  • To briefly assess how these initiatives may be of global benefit by examining how China may be encouraged to take a short cut to sustainable development and looking at joint approaches to China.

    • Agenda

  • Introduction and background to the event. Baudouin de Sonis, Chief Executive of EU e-Forum, Brussels.

    • Presentations of some current EU FP7 Projects

  • The IMPACT Project
    Tools to support policy-making using computational argumentation.
    Professor of Digital Governance, Co-Director of the Centre for Digital Citizenship, The University of Leeds.
  • The CATCH Project
    Tools in a carbon-reduction context.
    Dr Steve Cassidy, MRCMH, Edinburgh
  • +SPACES project
    Michael Gardner, University of Essex.
  • The FUPOL project
    Tools in a sustainable development context.
    Gary Simpson and Jonathan Gay –EASY Connects, South Yorkshire.
  • PADGETS project
    A toolset that will allow citizens and public administration decision makers to engage interactively in group planning, simulation and assessment of governmental policy.
    Prof Paul Foley, Tech4i2 Loughborough/Brussels.
  • CROSSOVER project
    Reinforcing links between different global communities of policymakers, researchers, experts and citizens through a combination of content production and ad hoc and online and offline animation.
    Prof Paul Foley, Tech4i2
  • ePOLICY project
    Supporting the decision making process through opinion-mining and visualisation tools.
    Tina Balke, University of Surrey.
  • iSAC+6
    A tool for filtering and redirecting public service enquiries using text analytics and an ontological information structure.

    • Policy making and the real world
    Presentations of three new Interreg IVC projects with South Yorkshire partners covering sharing of current best practice in environmental policy making, set in a wider vision for Sheffield.

  • Slicker Cities: Doing the right thing
    Policies which are required to enable Sheffield to become an exemplar in tackling climate change.
    Edward Murphy. Technical Director. Mott MacDonald.
  • RE-GREEN Project
    Sheffield sustainable development policy.
    Adrian Hacket, Building for Future, Sheffield.
  • RENERGY Project
    Ian Bloomfield, Durham County Council
  • South Yorkshire Forest Interreg IVC Project

    • What Next?

  • Presentation of event to take place in China in July to share best practice in governance and establish strong future collaborations. Dr Shaun Topham, President EU e-Forum and EU-China e-Forum.
  • Discussion covering opportunities for realising any synergies emerging between the various initiatives represented or for new initiatives.
    Dr Bridgette Wessels, ICOSS, University of Sheffield

    • By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    EXTENDED CFP – Workshop on Semantic Processing of Legal Texts (SPLeT 2012)

    In conjunction with
    Language Resources and Evaluation Conference 2012 (LREC 2012)
    27 May, 2012
    Istanbul, Turkey
    REVISED SUBMISSION DEADLINE FOR WORKSHOP: 19 February 2012
    Context
    The legal domain represents a primary candidate for web-based information distribution, exchange and management, as testified by the numerous e-government, e-justice and e-democracy initiatives worldwide. The last few years have seen a growing body of research and practice in the field of Artificial Intelligence and Law which addresses a range of topics: automated legal reasoning and argumentation, semantic and cross-language legal information retrieval, document classification, legal drafting, legal knowledge discovery and extraction, as well as the construction of legal ontologies and their application to the law domain. In this context, it is of paramount importance to use Natural Language Processing techniques and tools that automate and facilitate the process of knowledge extraction from legal texts.
    Since 2008, the SPLeT workshops have been a venue where researchers from the Computational Linguistics and Artificial Intelligence and Law communities meet, exchange information, compare perspectives, and share experiences and concerns on the topic of legal knowledge extraction and management, with particular emphasis on the semantic processing of legal texts. Within the Artificial Intelligence and Law community, there have also been a number of dedicated workshops and tutorials specifically focussing on different aspects of semantic processing of legal texts at conferences such as JURIX-2008, ICAIL-2009, ICAIL-2011, as well as in the International Summer School “Managing Legal Resources in the Semantic Web” (2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011).
    To continue this momentum and to advance research, a 4th Workshop on “Semantic Processing of Legal Texts” is being organized at the LREC-2012 conference to bring to the attention of the broader LR/HLT (Language Resources/Human Language Technology) community the specific technical challenges posed by the semantic processing of legal texts and also share with the community the motivations and objectives which make it of interest to researchers in legal informatics. The outcome of these interactions are expected to advance research and applications and foster interdisciplinary collaboration within the legal domain.
    New to this edition of the workshop are two sub-events (described below) to provide common and consistent task definitions, datasets, and evaluation for legal-IE systems along with a forum for the presentation of varying but focused efforts on their development.
    The main goals of the workshop and associated events are to provide an overview of the state-of-the-art in legal knowledge extraction and management, to explore new research and development directions and emerging trends, and to exchange information regarding legal language resources and human language technologies and their applications.
    Sub-events
    Dependency Parsing
    The first sub-event will be a shared task specifically focusing on dependency parsing of legal texts: although this is not a domain-specific task, it is a task which creates the prerequisites for advanced IE applications operating on legal texts, which can benefit from reliable preprocessing tools. For this year our aim is to create the prerequisites for more advanced domain-specific tasks (e.g. event extraction) to be organized in future SPLeT editions. We strongly believe that this could be a way to attract the attention of the LR/HLT community to the specific challenges posed by the analysis of this type of texts and to have a clearer idea of the current state of the art. The languages dealt with will be Italian and English. A specific Call for Participation for the shared task is available in a dedicated page.
    Semantic Annotation
    The second sub-event will be an online, manual, collaborative, semantic annotation exercise, the results of which will be presented and discussed at the workshop. The goals of the exercise are: (1) to gain insight on and work towards the creation of a gold standard corpus of legal documents in a cohesive domain; and (2) to test the feasibility of the exercise and to get feedback on its annotation structure and workflow. The corpus to be annotated will be a selection of documents drawn from EU and US legislation, regulation, and case law in a particular domain (e.g. consumer or environmental protection). For this exercise, the language will be English. A specific Call for Participation for this annotation exercise is available in a dedicated page.
    Areas of Interest
    The workshop will focus on the topics of the automatic extraction of information from legal texts and the structural organisation of the extracted knowledge. Particular emphasis will be given to the crucial role of language resources and human language technologies.
    Papers are invited on, but not limited to, the following topics:

  • Construction, extension, merging, customization of legal language resources, e.g. terminologies, thesauri, ontologies, corpora
  • Information retrieval and extraction from legal texts
  • Semantic annotation of legal text
  • Legal text processing
  • Multilingual aspects of legal text semantic processing
  • Legal thesauri mapping
  • Automatic Classification of legal documents
  • Logical analysis of legal language
  • Automated parsing and translation of natural language legal arguments into a logical formalism
  • Dialogue protocols for legal information processing
  • Controlled language systems for law

    • LREC Conference Information (Accommodation, Travel, Registration)
    Language Resources and Evaluation Conference 2012 (LREC 2012)
    Workshop Schedule – TBA
    Workshop Registration and Location – TBA
    Webpage URLs

  • This page is http://wyner.info/LanguageLogicLawSoftware/?p=1233
  • An alternative workshop webpage

    • Important Dates:

  • REVISED Submission: 19 February 2012
  • Acceptance Notification: 12 March 2012
  • Final Version: 30 March 2012
  • Workshop date: 27 May 2012

    • Author Guidelines:
    Submissions are solicited from researchers working on all aspects of semantic processing of legal texts. Authors are invited to submit papers describing original completed work, work in progress, interesting problems, case studies or research trends related to one or more of the topics of interest listed above. The final version of the accepted papers will be published in the Workshop Proceedings.
    Short or full papers can be submitted. Short papers are expected to present new ideas or new visions that may influence the direction of future research, yet they may be less mature than full papers. While an exhaustive evaluation of the proposed ideas is not necessary, insight and in-depth understanding of the issues is expected. Full papers should be more well developed and evaluated. Short papers will be reviewed the same way as full papers by the Program Committee and will be published in the Workshop Proceedings.
    Full paper submissions should not exceed 10 pages, short papers 6 pages. See the style guidelines and files on the LREC site:
    Authors’ Kit and Templates
    Submit papers to:
    Submission for the workshop uses the START submission system at:
    https://www.softconf.com/lrec2012/LegalTexts2012/
    Note that when submitting a paper through the START page, authors will be asked to provide essential information about resources (in a broad sense, i.e. also technologies, standards, evaluation kits, etc.) that have been used for the work described in the paper or are a new result of your research. For further information on this new initiative, please refer to:
    http://www.lrec-conf.org/lrec2012/?LRE-Map-2012
    Publication:
    After the workshop a number of selected, revised, peer-reviewed articles will be published in a Special Issue on Semantic Processing of Legal Texts of the AI and Law Journal (Springer).
    Contact Information:
    Address any queries regarding the workshop to:
    lrec_legalWS@ilc.cnr.it
    Program Committee Co-Chairs:
    Enrico Francesconi (National Research Center, Italy)
    Simonetta Montemagni (National Research Center, Italy)
    Wim Peters (University of Sheffield, UK)
    Adam Wyner (University of Liverpool, UK)
    Program Committee (Preliminary):
    Kevin Ashley (University of Pittsburgh, USA)
    Johan Bos (University of Rome, Italy)
    Daniele Bourcier (Humboldt Universitat, Germany)
    Pompeu Casanovas (Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Spain)
    Jack Conrad (Thomson Reuters, USA)
    Matthias Grabmair (University of Pittsburgh, USA)
    Antonio Lazari (Scuola Superiore S.Anna, Italy)
    Leonardo Lesmo (Universita di Torino, Italy)
    Marie-Francine Moens (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium)
    Thorne McCarty (Rutgers University, USA)
    Raquel Mochales Palau (Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium)
    Paulo Quaresma (Universidade de Evora, Portugal)
    Tony Russell-Rose (UXLabs, UK)
    Erich Schweighofer (Universitat Wien, Austria)
    Rolf Schwitter (Macquarie University, Australia)
    Manfred Stede (University of Potsdam, Germany)
    Daniela Tiscornia (National Research Council, Italy)
    Tom van Engers (University of Amsterdam, Netherlands)
    Giulia Venturi (Scuola Superiore S.Anna, Italy)
    Vern R. Walker (Hofstra University, USA)
    Radboud Winkels (University of Amsterdam, Netherlands)
    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    UMMS Workshop Paper: Arguing about Emotions

    Martyn Lloyd-Kelly and I have a forthcoming paper on arguing about emotions in legal cases where the ‘heat of passion’ plays a role. It appears in the proceedings of the Workshop on User Models for Motivational Systems the affective and the rational routes to persuasion.
    Arguing about Emotions
    Martyn Lloyd-Kelly and Adam Wyner
    Abstract
    Emotions are commonly thought to be beyond rational analysis. In this paper, we develop the position that emotions can be the objects of argumentation and used as terms in emotional argumentation schemes. Thus, we can argue about whether or not, according to normative standards and available evidence, it is plausible that an individual had a particular emotion. This is particularly salient in legal cases, where decisions can depend on explicit arguments about emotional states.
    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    Papers Accepted to the JURIX 2011 Conference

    My colleagues and I have had two papers (one long and one short) accepted for presentation at The 24th International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX 2011). The papers are available on the links.
    On Rule Extraction from Regulations
    Adam Wyner and Wim Peters
    Abstract
    Rules in regulations such as found in the US Federal Code of Regulations can be expressed using conditional and deontic rules. Identifying and extracting such rules from the language of the source material would be useful for automating rulebook management and translating into an executable logic. The paper presents a linguistically-oriented, rule-based approach, which is in contrast to a machine learning approach. It outlines use cases, discusses the source materials, reviews the methodology, then provides initial results and future steps.
    Populating an Online Consultation Tool
    Sarah Pulfrey-Taylor, Emily Henthorn, Katie Atkinson, Adam Wyner, and Trevor Bench-Capon
    Abstract
    The paper addresses the extraction, formalisation, and presentation of public policy arguments. Arguments are extracted from documents that comment on public policy proposals. Formalising the information from the arguments enables the construction of models and systematic analysis of the arguments. In addition, the arguments are represented in a form suitable for presentation in an online consultation tool. Thus, the forms in the consultation correlate with the formalisation and can be evaluated accordingly. The stages of the process are outlined with reference to a working example.
    Shortlink to this page.
    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    Workshop on Modelling Policy-making (MPM 2011)

    In conjunction with
    The 24th International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX 2011)
    Wednesday December 14, 2011
    University of Vienna
    Vienna, Austria
    Context:
    As the European Union develops, issues about governance, legitimacy, and transparency become more pressing. National governments and the EU Commission realise the need to promote widespread, deliberative democracy in the policy-making cycle, which has several phases: 1) agenda setting, 2) policy analysis, 3) lawmaking, 4) administration and implementation, and 5) monitoring. As governments must become more efficient and effective with the resources available, modern information and communications technology (ICT) are being drawn on to address problems of information processing in the phases. One of the key problems is policy content analysis and modelling, particularly the gap between on the one hand policy proposals and formulations that are expressed in quantitative and narrative forms and on the other hand formal models that can be used to systematically represent and reason with the information contained in the proposals and formulations.
    Submission Focus:
    The workshop invites submissions of original research about the application of ICT to the early phases of the policy cycle, namely those before the legislators fix the legislation: agenda setting, policy analysis, and lawmaking. The research should seek to address the gap noted above. The workshop focuses particularly on using and integrating a range of subcomponents – information extraction, text processing, representation, modelling, simulation, reasoning, and argument – to provide policy making tools to the public and public administrators.
    Intended Audience:
    Legal professionals, government administrators, political scientists, and computer scientists.
    Areas of Interest:

    • information extraction from natural language text
    • policy ontologies
    • formal logical representations of policies
    • transformations from policy language to executable policy rules
    • argumentation about policy proposals
    • web-based tools that support participatory policy-making
    • tools for increasing public understanding of arguments behind policy decisions
    • visualising policies and arguments about policies
    • computational models of policies and arguments about policies
    • integration tools
    • multi-agent policy simulations

    Preliminary Workshop Schedule:
    09:45-10:00 Workshop Opening comments
    10:00-11:00 Paper Session 1

    • Using PolicyCommons to support the policy-consultation process: investigating a new workflow and policy-deliberation data model
      Neil Benn and Ann Macintosh
    • A Problem Solving Model for Regulatory Policy Making
      Alexander Boer, Tom Van Engers and Giovanni Sileno

    11:00-11:15 Break (coffee, tea, air etc.)
    11:15-12:15 Paper Session 2

    • Linking Semantic Enrichment to Legal Documents
      Akos Szoke, Andras Forhecz, Krisztian Macsar and Gyorgy Strausz
    • Semantic Models and Ontologies in Modelling Policy-making
      Adam Wyner, Katie Atkinson and Trevor Bench-Capon

    12:15-13:15 Lunch break
    13:15-14:45 Paper Session 3

    • Consistent Conceptual Descriptions to Support Formal Policy Model Development: Metamodel and Approach
      Sabrina Scherer and Maria Wimmer
    • The Policy Modeling Tool of the IMPACT Argumentation Toolbox
      Thomas Gordon
    • Ontologies for Governance, Risk Management and Policy Compliance
      Jorge Gonzalez-Conejero, Albert Merono-Penuela and David Fernandez Gamez

    14:45-15:00 Break (coffee, tea, air etc.)
    15:00-16:00 Paper Session 4 and Closing discussion

    • Policy making: How rational is it?
      Tom Van Engers, Ignace Snellen and Wouter Van Haaften
    • Closing discussion

    Workshop Registration and Location:
    Please see the JURIX 2011 website for all information about registration and location.
    Webpage URL:
    http://wyner.info/LanguageLogicLawSoftware/?p=1157
    Important Dates:

    • Submission: Monday, October 24
    • Review Notification: Monday, November 7
    • Final Version: Thursday, December 1
    • Workshop date: Wednesday, December 14

    Author Guidelines:
    Submit position papers of between 2-5 pages in length in PDF format and using the IOS Press style files and authors’ guidelines at:
    IOS Press Author Instructions
    Submit papers to:
    MPM 2011 on EasyChair
    Publication:
    The position papers are available only in an electronic version from the following link:
    Proceedings of the Workshop on Modelling Policy-making
    A call for selected extended versions of the papers will be issued for a special issue of AI and Law on Modelling Policy-making.
    Contact Information:
    Adam Wyner, adam@wyner.info
    Neil Benn, n.j.l.benn@leeds.ac.uk
    Program Committee Co-Chairs:
    Adam Wyner (University of Liverpool, UK)
    Neil Benn (University of Leeds, UK)
    Program Committee (Preliminary):
    Katie Atkinson
    Trevor Bench-Capon
    Bruce Edmonds
    Tom van Engers
    Euripidis Loukis
    Tom Gordon
    Ann Macintosh
    Gunther Schefbeck
    Maria Wimmer
    Radboud Winkels
    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    Draft Materials for LEX 2011

    Draft post
    At the links below, you can find the slides and hands on materials on GATE for the LEX summer school on Managing Legal Resources in the Semantic Web.
    GATE Legislative Rulebook
    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    TO BE UPDATED: Instructions for Online Collaborative Legal Case Annotation Task

    TO BE UPDATED for the SPLeT 2012 task. The information here and in the links here are out of date. The material is being updated for the task, so please return at a later date or email the authors. Thanks for your interest.
    — Adam
    Wim Peters and I ran a pilot experiment in online, collaborative annotation for legal case factors. The slides are below. Now that we know more about how to present such materials, we need to find a cooperative population of law students to scale up and deepen the work.
    Annotating Legal Case Factors with GATE TeamWare
    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    LOAIT Workshop Paper on Legal Text Annotation

    A paper I presented at 4th Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques is to appear in the journal Rivista Informatica e diritto, an Italian journal on AI and Law.
    Towards Annotating and Extracting Textual Legal Case Elements
    Adam Wyner
    Abstract
    The paper presents an outline of a method for semantic, conceptual search in legal case documents using the GATE tool.
    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    On ICAIL 2011 Discussion on Legal Corpus Development and Text Analytics

    In this note, I point to various parts of a discussion on developing and analysing legal textual data raised at ICAIL 2011. Please feel free to add comments to this document (or to me in person, by email, on your blog and linked to this, etc), which I can then add to the post (I’m very happy to attribute contributions). The intention is to stimulate discussion on these matters to help the community of researchers move ahead on common interests.
    Corpus Development
    Unlike the situation from several years ago, we have accessible sources of large corpora of legal textual information. The World Legal Information Institutes provide free, independent and non-profit access to worldwide law. For example, one can go to the US site and download cases: United States v Grant [1961] USCA9 19; 286 F.2d 157 (19 January 1961); one can request zipped files or screen scrap cases. The LIIs have introduced standardised references and formats for cases. There are boolean and regex searches.
    From the contacts that I have had (e.g. in the US and UK), the LIIs would be very happy to collaborate with academic researchers in the analysis of their data and in keeping with their primary mission. In particular, developing tools that can be integrated and deployed with their platforms might be a way to go, thereby addressing significant platform and dissemination issues.
    Another source of corpora is public.resource.org, which distributes a range of corpora covering legislation, codes, and cases.
    Analysis and Annotation
    There are a range of issues about information retrieval and extraction. Others can speak about IR, statistical, machine learning approaches. What I know better is annotation, whether fully or semi automatic and manual. Here we have issues about what to annotate and how. Some low level information is unproblematic (e.g. entities of a range of sorts, sections, and sentiment); higher level information (e.g. factors) might be more complex. I have some suggestions for annotations for low level information; a good starting point for factors are the CATO factors, though there is a general issue about how to extend factor identification to other domains (CATO factors are specific for intellectual property).
    One general problem with analysis is that different researchers might use different tools in their work and just report the results. This means results are not interchangeable, which is particularly problematic with annotation work. If a common ‘framework’ tool is used and some consensus is developed about (at least) low level annotation types, then work can proceed more collaboratively, transparently, and reproducibly. One can develop a more forceful argument for researchers (public service bodies and information providers) to promote such an open development methodology (among them are justification and traceability, see Wyner and Peters 2010 and David Lewis’s ICAIL 2011 keynote address on related points). General Architecture for Text Engineering is an open framework for text processing modules.
    There are ‘open’ systems for text annotation — Open Calais and Open Up platform’s data enrichment service from The Stationery Office. However, there are intellectual property issues that need to be considered.
    Another general issue is how to carry out manual annotation, for example to build gold standards, which are required for machine learning systems. There has been significant progress, for example, with TeamWare, which provides for curated, web-based annotation tools along with annotation analysis (e.g. inter-annotator agreement). For a short tutorial (for an experiment) on using TeamWare for annotation of some legal case factors, see Web-based Annotation Support for the Law. Wim Peters and I proposed to law school faculty to use this tool to support their student exercises for first and second year students since these exercises often require identifying and extracting information from cases. Wim and I think integrating annotation exercises into legal e-learning could both help to develop large annotated sets of data and to serve an important educational purpose. See our paper about some of these points and proposals.
    Research Questions
    Large corpora can be formed, tools can be applied to them, but for fund raising, the community needs to develop a range of motivating research questions and use cases. Asides from questions pursued in the AI and Law community, we might consult further with public bodies (National Center for State Courts and similar), legal information service providers (Lexis-Nexis, ThomsonReuters, Practical Law Company, law societies, political scientists, etc. The kinds of answers we look for partially guide how we structure not only the corpora, but moreso the annotations.
    Funding Opportunities
    Digging into Data and the Request for Proposals, but the due date is June 16 (I had been working on a proposal, but needed better research questions to hold local interest). Though the deadline is too soon to submit a proposal, it does demonstrate a widespread interest in funding bodies in the development and analysis of large corpora in the humanities and social sciences. The other obvious funding sources are national (US, UK, French, etc) and international (EU and Digging into Data).
    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

    General Architecture for Text Engineering Summer School 2011

    I had the opportunity (thanks Katie Atkinson!) to attend the General Architecture for Text Engineering Summer School 2011. The GATE people have really developed this summer school very well. It was well attended (70 participants?) and well structured (three sections and various talks). GATE attacts a good, outgoing, helpful, and diverse group of people. A whole week of GATE and never a dull moment. Geeky, but true. And text analytics seems to be a growing area (at least according to the May 2011 issue of New Scientist, which lists it as one of seven “disruptive” technologies; I’ve always wanted to be bad).
    As this was my second time at the GATE summer school, I sat in on the Advanced GATE session. All the slides and all the materials for hands on exercises are available on the GATE Summer School Wiki. In my week, we covered the following:

    • Module 9: Ontologies and Semantic Annotation
      • Introduction to Ontologies
      • GATE Ontology Editor
      • GATE Ontology Annotation Tools for Entities and Relations
      • Automatic Semantic Annotation in GATE
      • Measuring Performance
      • Using the Large Knowledge Base gazetteer (LKB)
    • Module 10: Advanced GATE Applications
      • Customising ANNIE
      • Working with different languages
      • Complex applications
      • Conditional Processing
      • Section-by-section processing
    • Module 11: Machine Learning
      • Machine learning and evaluation concepts
      • Using ML in GATE
      • Engines and algorithms)
      • Entity learning hands-onl session
      • Relation extraction hands-on session
    • Module 12: Opinion Mining
      • Introduction to opinion mining and sentiment analysis
      • Using GATE tools to perform sentiment analysis
      • Machine learning for sentiment analysis hands-on session
      • Future directions for opinion mining
    • Module 13: Semantic Technology and Linked Open Data: Basics, Tools, and Applications
      • Linked Open Data: Introduction of key principles and some key tools (FactForge, LinkedLifeData)
      • Semantic Annotation with Linked Data
      • Semantic Search

    By Adam Wyner

    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.