Evaluating Scoped Meaning Representations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Semantic parsing offers many opportunities to improve natural language understanding. We present a semantically annotated parallel corpus for English, German, Italian, and Dutch where sentences are aligned with scoped meaning representations in order to capture the semantics of negation, modals, quantification, and presupposition triggers. The semantic formalism is based on Discourse Representation Theory, but concepts are represented by WordNet synsets and thematic roles by VerbNet relations. Translating scoped meaning representations to sets of clauses enables us to compare them for the purpose of semantic parser evaluation and checking translations. This is done by computing precision and recall on matching clauses, in a similar way as is done for Abstract Meaning Representations. We show that our matching tool for evaluating scoped meaning representations is both accurate and efficient. Applying this matching tool to three baseline semantic parsers yields F-scores between 43% and 54%. A pilot study is performed to automatically find changes in meaning by comparing meaning representations of translations. This comparison turns out to be an additional way of (i) finding annotation mistakes and (ii) finding instances where our semantic analysis needs to be improved.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 23 Feb 2018.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 1; 2023: 2; 2024: 3; 2025: 2.
10 papers.
- 2023SMATCH++: Standardized and Extended Evaluation of Semantic Graphscited by 19
- 2021Weisfeiler-Leman in the BAMBOO: Novel AMR Graph Metrics and a Benchmark for AMR Graph Similaritycited by 15
- 2021SyGNS: A Systematic Generalization Testbed Based on Natural Language Semanticscited by 7
- 2024Neural Semantic Parsing with Extremely Rich Symbolic Meaning Representationscited by 5
- 2024MACT: Model-Agnostic Cross-Lingual Training for Discourse Representation Structure Parsingcited by 3
- 2025A Theorem-Proving-Based Evaluation of Neural Semantic Parsingcited by 1
- 2022SMARAGD: Learning SMatch for Accurate and Rapid Approximate Graph Distancecited by 0
- 2023Does Character-level Information Always Improve DRS-based Semantic Parsing?cited by 0
- 2024A Compositional Typed Semantics for Universal Dependenciescited by 0
- 2025Reassessing Graph Linearization for Sequence-to-sequence AMR Parsing: On the Advantages and Limitations of Triple-Based Encodingcited by 0
- 2025A Theorem-Proving-Based Evaluation of Neural Semantic Parsing13 Oct 2025
- 2025Reassessing Graph Linearization for Sequence-to-sequence AMR Parsing: On the Advantages and Limitations of Triple-Based Encoding13 May 2025
- 2024MACT: Model-Agnostic Cross-Lingual Training for Discourse Representation Structure Parsing3 Jun 2024
- 2024Neural Semantic Parsing with Extremely Rich Symbolic Meaning Representations19 Apr 2024
- 2024A Compositional Typed Semantics for Universal Dependencies2 Mar 2024
- 2023Does Character-level Information Always Improve DRS-based Semantic Parsing?4 Jun 2023
- 2023SMATCH++: Standardized and Extended Evaluation of Semantic Graphs11 May 2023
- 2022SMARAGD: Learning SMatch for Accurate and Rapid Approximate Graph Distance24 Mar 2022
- 2021Weisfeiler-Leman in the BAMBOO: Novel AMR Graph Metrics and a Benchmark for AMR Graph Similarity26 Aug 2021
- 2021SyGNS: A Systematic Generalization Testbed Based on Natural Language Semantics2 Jun 2021