Range concatenation grammars

Known as: Range concatenation grammar, Range concatenation language 
Range concatenation grammar (RCG) is a grammar formalism developed by Pierre Boullier in 1998 as an attempt to characterize a number of phenomena of… (More)
Wikipedia

Topic mentions per year

Topic mentions per year

1998-2015
024619982015

Papers overview

Semantic Scholar uses AI to extract papers important to this topic.
2010
2010
In this paper we present a parsing framework for extensions of Tree Adjoining Grammars (TAG) called TuLiPA (Tübingen Linguistic… (More)
  • figure 1
Is this relevant?
2009
2009
We present a CYK and an Earley-style algorithm for parsing Range Concatenation Grammar (RCG), using the deductive parsing… (More)
  • table 1
Is this relevant?
2009
2009
Range Concatenation Grammars (RCGs) are a syntactic formalism which possesses many attractive properties. It is more powerful… (More)
  • figure 1
  • figure 2
  • figure 3
  • figure 4
  • figure 5
Is this relevant?
2009
2009
We present an Earley-style parser for simple range concatenation grammar, a formalism strongly equivalent to linear context-free… (More)
Is this relevant?
2008
2008
Positive and bottom-up non-erasing binary range concatenation grammars (Boullier, 1998) with at most binary predicates ((2,2… (More)
  • figure 1
Is this relevant?
2008
2008
This paper investigates the relation between TT-MCTAG, a formalism used in computational linguistics, and RCG. RCGs are known to… (More)
  • figure 1
  • figure 3
Is this relevant?
2004
2004
In this paper we introduce a novel framework to compute jointly syntactic parses and semantic representations of a written… (More)
Is this relevant?
2003
2003
 
Is this relevant?
2001
2001
Though the field of natural language processing is one of the major aims that has led to the definition of contextual grammars… (More)
Is this relevant?
1999
1999
The notion of mild context-sensitivity was formulated in an at tempt to express the formal power which is both necessary and… (More)
  • figure 2
  • figure 4
  • figure 5
  • figure 6
Is this relevant?