Timeline for Does an abstract syntax tree have to be a tree?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Feb 10, 2014 at 16:50 | history | suggested | babou | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
wrong word used, probably typo.
|
| Feb 10, 2014 at 16:47 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 10, 2014 at 16:50 | |||||
| Feb 10, 2014 at 16:45 | comment | added | babou | The original GLR parser (the one called that way) may have produced a parse DAG because it was bugged. Since the number of possible parses can be infinite in general, there is no way you can represent this infinity with a finite structure containing no cyle. The actual strcture is a kind of bipartite graph, a bit similar to an and-or graph. It is also known under another name. This inability to represent infinite ambiguity could be a problem in various NLP situations.The end of the last sentence is a bit weird (or meaningless), and I corrected a double typo (I guess). | |
| Jul 7, 2013 at 20:17 | history | answered | D.W.♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |