Named Entity Recognition: Examining the Stanford NER Tagger | Hacker News Reader

Named Entity Recognition: Examining the Stanford NER Tagger

blog.urx.com

26 pointsjmilinovich5 comments

Next, try the taggers on a more realistic setting than the standard corpuses -- e.g. a product review that compares several products, and you'll instantly see how incredibly poor the current state of the art NER is.

Technology is really going to advance once we have anything that comes close to human level on NER and relation extraction. Kind of like self driving cars, the basic ideas have been around for decades, but performance in realistic adverse conditions remains awful for almost everywhere that it could theoretically be used.

That is because the taggers are not trained on the same data. You can't expect taggers trained on wikipedia data to do well in anything but other wikipedia articles. On the other hand, if one has access to Amazon review data, (with links to the product catalog), I am pretty sure a tagger that does well on Amazon data can be trained.

Well that depends, if you somehow manage to link well across different domains it can be done. Take a look at the Lowlands project from Copenhagen University (http://lowlands.ku.dk), which deals specifically with cross domain adaptation.

You are right that reasonable domains are required though.

It's always nice to know that your masters programme requires more of you in just an exam (building a Relation Extraction pipeline including POS tagging and a NER system).

Having said that, it's been shown pretty well that CRF's outperform the Stanford Parser with simple features (it can get even better with better features - particularly for organisations), which also beat out HMM's but it could be interesting to see how neural networks would do.

Where did you see this was for a masters programme?

Also, it depends. When I was working on my masters (which I didn't finish :) ), there were three options:

* Thesis * Project * Extra Courses

Reply on news.ycombinator.com