Neural Coreference Resolution for Dutch Parliamentary Documents with the DutchParliament Dataset
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The task of coreference resolution concerns the clustering of words and phrases referring to the same entity in text, either in the same document or across multiple documents. The task is challenging, as it concerns elements of named entity recognition and reading comprehension, as well as others. In this paper, we introduce DutchParliament, a new Dutch coreference resolution dataset obtained through the manual annotation of 74 government debates, expanded with a domain-specific class. In contrast to existing datasets, which are often composed of news articles, blogs or other documents, the debates in DutchParliament are transcriptions of speech, and therefore offer a unique structure and way of referencing compared to other datasets. By constructing and releasing this dataset, we hope to facilitate the research on coreference resolution in niche domains, with different characteristics than traditional datasets. The DutchParliament dataset was compared to SoNaR-1 and RiddleCoref, two other existing Dutch coreference resolution corpora, to highlight its particularities and differences from existing datasets. Furthermore, two coreference resolution models for Dutch, the rule-based DutchCoref model and the neural e2eDutch model, were evaluated on the DutchParliament dataset to examine their performance on the DutchParliament dataset. It was found that the characteristics of the DutchParliament dataset are quite different from that of the other two datasets, although the performance of the e2eDutch model does not seem to be significantly affected by this. Furthermore, experiments were conducted by utilizing the metadata present in the DutchParliament corpus to improve the performance of the e2eDutch model. The results indicate that the addition of available metadata about speakers has a beneficial effect on the performance of the model, although the addition of the gender of speakers seems to have a limited effect.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it