some questions on the amr tutorial sentences

[ArchnaBhatia]

1.-----
The boy must not go. [isi_0001_5]

Annotator archna

(o / obligate-01
     :ARG1 (b / boy)
     :ARG2 (g / go-02
          :polarity -
          :ARG0 b)) 

Annotator consensus

(o / obligate-01
     :ARG2 (g / go-02
          :polarity -
          :ARG0 (b / boy)))

QUESTION: Why do we not have an ARG1 for "obligate" - is it because we assume that we don't have 2 clauses here?

2.-----
The man died between the house and the river. [isi_0001_21]

Annotator archna

(d / die-01
     :ARG1 (m / man)
     :location (b / between
          :op1 (h / house)
          :op2 (r / river))) 

Annotator consensus

(d / die-01
     :ARG1 (m / man)
     :location (b / between
          :op1 (h / house)
          :op1 (r / river)))

QUESTION: Is there a principled way to determine if we will get the same relation op1 or different op1, op2 etc? In the following we get two different role names.

[35] consensus isi_0002.95 (snt. 132 in workset guidelines, last updated on Tue Jul 3, 2012)
The performance will take between 45 minutes and an hour.

(p / perform-01
      :duration (b / between
            :op1 (t / temporal-quantity :quant 45
                  :unit (m / minute))
            :op2 (t2 / temporal-quantity :quant 1
                  :unit (h / hour))))

3.-----
He was a participant in the scheme. [isi_0001_22]

Annotator archna

(p / participate-01
     :ARG0 (h / he
          :ARG2-of (s / scheme-01))) 

Annotator consensus

(p / participate-01
     :ARG0 (h / he)
     :ARG1 (s / scheme))

QUESTION: Why is "scheme" ARG1 of "participate"?

4.-----
According to government sources, the killing happened yesterday. [isi_0001_23]

Annotator archna TOP: report-01

(r / report-01
     :ARG0 (s / source
          :mod (g / government-organization))
     :ARG1 (k / kill-01
          :time (y / yesterday))) 

Annotator consensus TOP: say-01

(s / say-01
     :ARG0 (s2 / source
          :mod (g / government-organization
               :ARG0-of (g2 / govern-01)))
     :ARG1 (k / kill-01
          :time (y / yesterday)))

QUESTION: Why do we have ARG0-of? Is that necessary?

5.-----
The boy came and left. [isi_0001_24]

Annotator archna

(a / and
     :op1 (c / come-01
          :ARG0 (b / boy))
     :op2 (l / leave-01
          :ARG0 b)) 

Annotator consensus

(a / and
     :op1 (c / come-01
          :ARG1 (b / boy))
     :op2 (l / leave-01
          :ARG0 b))

QUESTION: Why is "boy" Arg1 instead of Arg0 for the predicate "come"? And do we differentiate between the unaccusative and unergative intransitive verbs for the PB labels here?

6.-----
The boy is a hard worker. [isi_0001_25]

Annotator archna TOP: work-01

(w / work-01
     :ARG0 (b / boy)
     :manner (h / hard)) 

Annotator consensus TOP: person

(p / person
     :domain (b / boy)
     :ARG0-of (w / work-01
          :manner (h / hard)))

QUESTION/COMMENT: I thought we would use "top person" when we want to express a noun phrase like "a hard worker (boy)" instead of a clause. If we have two ways to express this semantic content, we need to be consistent in whether we use one form or the other, I think we choose that depending on what is being focussed. If it is a nominal expression "a hard worker (boy)", the person is being focussed and the second annotation above seems better; but if it is clausal, the fact that the boy is a hard worker is focussed, so we use the first annotation above.

7.-----
the earlier plan

(p / plan
      :time (e / early
            :degree (m / more)))

QUESTION: This question is not that important but why do we not mark it as "plan-01"? Is it because it was not a verb but a noun?

8.-----
several hundred boys [isi_0001_32]

Annotator archna

(b / boy
     :quant (h / hundred
          :mod (s / several)))

Annotator consensus

(b / boy
     :quant (s / several
          :op1 100))

QUESTION: I'm not sure about this difference. I looked at the guidelines, I see we do it this (consensus) way, but I am just curious why we do it this way.

9.-----
about 10 miles [isi_0001_35]

Annotator archna TOP: distance-quantity

(d / distance-quantity
     :quant (a / about
          :op1 10)
     :unit (m / mile))

Annotator consensus TOP: about

(a / about
     :op1 (d / distance-quantity
          :quant 10
          :unit (m / mile)))

QUESTION: What is the difference between "about 10 miles" and "more than 4000 boys"/ "between 4000 and 5000 boys"? All are variations of quantities.

[uhermjakob]

2.----
Oops. Typo in guidelines. Should be :op2 (r / river). Corrected. Thanks.

3.----
scheme fills the :ARG1 slot for participate-01.
The other AMR means something like "Co-scheming, he participated."

4.----
Our objective was to uniformly map "according to" to a verb frame. There were several possible choices. We picked say-01.

5.----
The verb frame for come-01 has no :ARG0.

6.----
I think both AMRs are ok. The consensus AMR emphasizes that worker stands for a "person who works".
And "The boy is a hard-working person." matches our standard "X is Y" pattern, which we typically render as "Y :domain X".

7.----
Plan is a tricky word. We verbalize it when it describes a planning event. But for cases like "She selected the cell phone company's basic family plan." the meaning of "plan" is more that of a fee schedule.

8.---- and 9.----
Our objective was to represent non-exact quantities in a uniform way. We decided to have the "fuzzy operators" such as approximately X, more than X, between X and Y at the top, because they can have more than one :op (between). For more see http://www.isi.edu/~ulf/amr/lib/popup/quantities.html#non-exact-quantities

[nschneid]

(4): The convention for government is to always use govern-01 so there will be roles available when, e.g., the region governed is present. So U.S. government would be interpreted as "government-organization that governs the U.S.". This is admittedly ugly, but it works.

[kevincrawfordknight]

"the boy is a hard worker"

focus only affects the very top concept. the rest is determined by semantic relations, using inverses when necessary. for the very top of an AMR, we have a test that sometimes works -- wrap "believe" or "saw" or something around your AMR.

we can wrap the possibilities:

#1-style

(b / believe-01
  :arg0 (i / i)
  :arg1 (w / work-01
             :ARG0 (b / boy)
             :manner (h / hard)))

#2-style

(b / believe-01
  :arg0 (i / i)
  :arg1 (p / person
            :domain (b / boy)
            :ARG0-of (w / work-01
                            :manner (h / hard))))

the former seems a little better.

#3-style

(b / believe-01
  :arg0 (i / i)
  :arg1 (h / hard
            :manner-of (w / work-01
                               :ARG0 (b / boy))))

i would go with #3, but #1 seems ok too.

it's more clear for "i saw that the rock was hard" (#3 style) versus "i saw a hard rock" (#2 style).

ps. when thinking about focus, we don't think about "nominal" or "clausal" or syntactic things like that.