Could you restate your question? I could not understand what you want. Actually, your models are performing too good for a NER.
2015-02-27 23:34 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. <[email protected]>: > > Add -misclassified true > Very handy > > To evaluate you need a annotated corpus... > This was my problem. > No that I can run it I see measurements of 0.99XXXXX, but I noticed that > the better models -as determined by my separate unit tests, which check > what was actually classified- have lower measurements. > According to my test cases this is a very good model: > Precision: 0.9905921169966114Recall: 0.9946277476832162F-Measure: > 0.9926058304478945 > While this one is not so great: > Precision: 0.9951354487436962Recall: 0.9982540179970453F-Measure: > 0.9966922939388522 > Am I missing something here? > Thanks > On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 11:48 PM, William Colen < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Add > -misclassified trueto the command to output what was misclassified.But I > have a guess. To evaluate you need a annotated corpus. Is the > file /tmp/db-raw.txt annotated? It should look like this:<START:person> > Pierre Vinken <END> , 61 years old , will join the board as a nonexecutive > director Nov. 29 . > Mr . <START:person> Vinken <END> is chairman of Elsevier N.V. , the Dutch > publishing group . > <START:person> Rudolph Agnew <END> , 55 years old and former chairman of > Consolidated Gold Fields PLC , > was named a director of this British industrial conglomerate . > Regards,William2015-02-26 1:24 GMT-03:00 Richard Head Jr. > <[email protected]>: > > > Are you using 1.5.3? > > Yes. > > > Can you send a small sample? > I can't send the model. Any other options? What format is the file given > to the -data option supposed to be in? > Thanks > On Friday, February 20, 2015 2:14 PM, William Colen < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Are you using 1.5.3? Can you send a small sample? > > Em segunda-feira, 16 de fevereiro de 2015, Richard Head Jr. > <[email protected]> escreveu: > > I ran the command line evaluator several times on tokenized/untokenized > and large/small input but get no results (see below). The model appears to > be finding tokens quite well, I'd just like to evaluate *how* well: > > opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -data some-data.txt -model a-model.bin > Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.111s) > > > Average: 104.2 sent/s > Total: 15 sent > Runtime: 0.144s > > Precision: 0.0 > Recall: 0.0 > F-Measure: -1.0 > > Now on a larger set of data: > > opennlp TokenNameFinderEvaluator -encoding latin1 -data /tmp/db-raw.txt > -model a-model.bin > Loading Token Name Finder model ... done (0.156s) > current: 364.9 sent/s avg: 364.9 sent/s total: 366 sent > current: 427.4 sent/s avg: 396.1 sent/s total: 793 sent > > > Average: 477.7 sent/s > Total: 1434 sent > Runtime: 3.002s > > Precision: 0.0 > Recall: 0.0 > F-Measure: -1.0 > > > > What am I doing wrong? > > > Thanks > > > > -- > William Colen > > > > > > > >
