BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Eric Neufeld

Eric Neufeld contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial IntelligenceComputation and Language

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2013arXiv

Conditioning on Disjunctive Knowledge: Defaults and Probabilities

Many writers have observed that default logics appear to contain the "lottery paradox" of probability theory. This arises when a default "proof by contradiction" lets us conclude that a typical X is not a Y where Y is an unusual subclass of X. We show that there is a similar problem with default "proof by cases" and construct a setting where we might draw a different conclusion knowing a disjunction than we would knowing any particular disjunct. Though Reiter's original formalism is capable of representing this distinction, other approaches are not. To represent and reason about this case, default logicians must specify how a "typical" individual is selected. The problem is closely related to Simpson's paradox of probability theory. If we accept a simple probabilistic account of defaults based on the notion that one proposition may favour or increase belief in another, the "multiple extension problem" for both conjunctive and disjunctive knowledge vanishes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Ending-based Strategies for Part-of-speech Tagging

Probabilistic approaches to part-of-speech tagging rely primarily on whole-word statistics about word/tag combinations as well as contextual information. But experience shows about 4 per cent of tokens encountered in test sets are unknown even when the training set is as large as a million words. Unseen words are tagged using secondary strategies that exploit word features such as endings, capitalizations and punctuation marks. In this work, word-ending statistics are primary and whole-word statistics are secondary. First, a tagger was trained and tested on word endings only. Subsequent experiments added back whole-word statistics for the words occurring most frequently in the training set. As grew larger, performance was expected to improve, in the limit performing the same as word-based taggers. Surprisingly, the ending-based tagger initially performed nearly as well as the word-based tagger; in the best case, its performance significantly exceeded that of the word-based tagger. Lastly, and unexpectedly, an effect of negative returns was observed - as grew larger, performance generally improved and then declined. By varying factors such as ending length and tag-list strategy, we achieved a success rate of 97.5 percent.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Probabilistic Semantics and Defaults

There is much interest in providing probabilistic semantics for defaults but most approaches seem to suffer from one of two problems: either they require numbers, a problem defaults were intended to avoid, or they generate peculiar side effects. Rather than provide semantics for defaults, we address the problem defaults were intended to solve: that of reasoning under uncertainty where numeric probability distributions are not available. We describe a non-numeric formalism called an inference graph based on standard probability theory, conditional independence and sentences of favouring where a favours b - favours(a, b) - p(a|b) > p(a). The formalism seems to handle the examples from the nonmonotonic literature. Most importantly, the sentences of our system can be verified by performing an appropriate experiment in the semantic domain.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Towards Solving the Multiple Extension Problem: Combining Defaults and Probabilities

The multiple extension problem arises frequently in diagnostic and default inference. That is, we can often use any of a number of sets of defaults or possible hypotheses to explain observations or make Predictions. In default inference, some extensions seem to be simply wrong and we use qualitative techniques to weed out the unwanted ones. In the area of diagnosis, however, the multiple explanations may all seem reasonable, however improbable. Choosing among them is a matter of quantitative preference. Quantitative preference works well in diagnosis when knowledge is modelled causally. Here we suggest a framework that combines probabilities and defaults in a single unified framework that retains the semantics of diagnosis as construction of explanations from a fixed set of possible hypotheses. We can then compute probabilities incrementally as we construct explanations. Here we describe a branch and bound algorithm that maintains a set of all partial explanations while exploring a most promising one first. A most probable explanation is found first if explanations are partially ordered.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access