AMR quality rating with a lightweight CNN
Table 3: Results for AMR quality rating w.r.t. various sub-tasks. † (‡): significant difference in correlations at p<0.05 (p<0.005).
['[EMPTY]', 'Quality Dim.', 'LG-LSTM', 'ours', 'change %']
Over almost every AMR quality dimension we see considerable improvements. A considerable improvement in Pearson’s ρ is achieved for NSFrames (+20.5% ρ) and coreference quality When rating the SRL-quality of an AMR parse, our model reduces the RMSE by appr. 4%.