+1 also needed for doccat.

Maybe it can be created by a class which could also
be used for doccat.

Jörn

On 02/26/2012 03:13 AM, Jason Baldridge wrote:
+1 Fine-grained error analysis FTW!

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 4:57 PM, [email protected]<
[email protected]>  wrote:

Hi,

I implemented a new EvaluationMonitor for the POS Tagger. It generates
a confusion
matrix<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confusion_matrix>  for each token that
was not tagged properly.

Example output (Portuguese):

...
Accuracy for [que]: 91,34%
1316 ocurrencies. Confusion matrix (line: reference; column: predicted):
           |    conj-s | pron-indp |       adv |  pron-det || % Accu ||
    conj-s |>      537<|       40  |        0  |        0  || 93,07% ||
  pron-indp |       59  |>      661<|        0  |        0  || 91,81% ||
       adv |        2  |       12  |>        4<|        0  || 22,22% ||
  pron-det |        0  |        1  |        0  |>        0<||     0% ||

Accuracy for [o]: 98,48%
3949 ocurrencies. Confusion matrix (line: reference; column: predicted):
           |       art |  pron-det | pron-pers |         , || % Accu ||
       art |>     3857<|        4  |        0  |        1  || 99,87% ||
  pron-det |       36  |>       24<|        0  |        0  ||    40% ||
  pron-pers |       19  |        0  |>        8<|        0  || 29,63% ||
         , |        0  |        0  |        0  |>        0<||     0% ||

Accuracy for [a]: 96%
4395 ocurrencies. Confusion matrix (line: reference; column: predicted):
           |       art |       prp | pron-pers |  pron-det || % Accu ||
       art |>     3291<|       54  |        0  |        0  || 98,39% ||
       prp |      107  |>      922<|        0  |        0  ||  89,6% ||
  pron-pers |        4  |        0  |>        4<|        0  ||    50% ||
  pron-det |       11  |        0  |        0  |>        2<|| 15,38% ||
...

Do you think it is interesting to make this report available?
I would add it to the CLI and it would be activated by an new argument that
pass in an output file for the report.

Thank you,
William




Reply via email to