mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Word Alignment-Based Evaluation of Uniform Meaning Representations

arXiv 2603.26401 ↗First posted 27 Mar 2026cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Comparison and evaluation of graph-based representations of sentence meaning is a challenge because competing representations of the same sentence may have different number of nodes, and it is not obvious which nodes should be compared to each other. Existing approaches favor node mapping that maximizes F1 score over node relations and attributes, regardless whether the similarity is intentional or accidental; consequently, the identified mismatches in values of node attributes are not useful for any detailed error analysis. We propose a node-matching algorithm that allows comparison of multiple Uniform Meaning Representations (UMR) of one sentence and that takes advantage of node-word alignments, inherently available in UMR. We compare it with previously used approaches, in particular smatch (the de-facto standard in AMR evaluation), and argue that sensitivity to word alignment makes the comparison of meaning representations more intuitive and interpretable, while avoiding the NP-hard search problem inherent in smatch. A script implementing the method is freely available.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 0 of its 17 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2026.

Builds on

0 of 17 references.

No references here yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.