A pragmatic guide to geoparsing evaluation

  • Gritta M
  • Pilehvar M
  • Collier N
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Empirical methods in geoparsing have thus far lacked a standard evaluation framework describing the task, metrics and data used to compare state-of-the-art systems. Evaluation is further made inconsistent, even unrepresentative of real world usage by the lack of distinction between the different types of toponyms , which necessitates new guidelines, a consolidation of metrics and a detailed toponym taxonomy with implications for Named Entity Recognition (NER) and beyond. To address these deficiencies, our manuscript introduces a new framework in three parts. (Part 1) Task Definition: clarified via corpus linguistic analysis proposing a fine-grained Pragmatic Taxonomy of Toponyms . (Part 2) Metrics: discussed and reviewed for a rigorous evaluation including recommendations for NER/Geoparsing practitioners. (Part 3) Evaluation data: shared via a new dataset called GeoWebNews to provide test/train examples and enable immediate use of our contributions. In addition to fine-grained Geotagging and Toponym Resolution (Geocoding), this dataset is also suitable for prototyping and evaluating machine learning NLP models.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gritta, M., Pilehvar, M. T., & Collier, N. (2020). A pragmatic guide to geoparsing evaluation. Language Resources and Evaluation, 54(3), 683–712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-019-09475-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free