Topic
Context-sensitive grammar
About: Context-sensitive grammar is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1938 publications have been published within this topic receiving 45911 citations. The topic is also known as: CSG.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: The LR(k) concept is generalized to ECFGs, a set of LR-preserving transformations fromECFGs to CFGs is given and finally it is shown how to construct LR-parsers directly from EC FGs.
Abstract: To improve the readability of a grammar it is common to use extended context free grammars (ECFGs) which are context free grammars (CFGs) extended with the repetition operator (*), the alternation operator (¦) and parentheses to express the right hand sides of the productions. The topic treated here is LR-parsing of ECFGs. The LR(k) concept is generalized to ECFGs, a set of LR-preserving transformations from ECFGs to CFGs is given and finally it is shown how to construct LR-parsers directly from ECFGs.
21 citations
01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: It is described how multimodal grammars for dialogue systems can be written using the Grammatical Framework (GF) formalism, and a proof-of-concept dialogue system constructed using these techniques is presented.
Abstract: We describe how multimodal grammars for dialogue systems can be written using the Grammatical Framework (GF) formalism. A
proof-of-concept dialogue system constructed using these techniques is also presented. The software engineering problem of keeping grammars for different languages, modalities and systems (such as speech recognizers and parsers) in sync is reduced by the formal relationship between the abstract and concrete syntaxes, and by generating equivalent grammars from GF grammars.
21 citations
01 Jan 1975
TL;DR: It is found that context-sensitive fractionally fuzzygrammars are recursive and can be parsed by most methods used for ordinary context-free grammars.
Abstract: A new type of fuzzy grammar, called the fractionally fuzzy grammar , is introduced. These grammars are especially suitable for pattern recognition because they are powerful and can easily be parsed. It is shown that the languages produced by the class of type i (Chomsky) fractionally fuzzy grammars properly includes the set of languages generated by type i fuzzy grammars. It is also shown that the set of languages generated by all type 3 (regular) fractionally fuzzy grammars is not a subset of the set of languages produced by all unrestricted (type 0) fuzzy grammars. It is found that context-sensitive fractionally fuzzy grammars are recursive and can be parsed by most methods used for ordinary context-free grammars. Finally, a pattern recognition experiment which uses fractionally fuzzy grammars to recognize the script letters i, e, t and l without the help of the dot on the i or the crossing of the t is given. The construction of a fractionally fuzzy grammar based on a training set and the experimental results are discussed.
21 citations
29 Jul 1974
TL;DR: Two-level grammars as introduced by the author in [2] have been used to define most of the syntax of ALGOL 68 and experience has shown that although these Grammars have the same generative power as Turing machines, they are much more manageable.
Abstract: Two-level grammars as introduced by the author in [2] have been used to define most of the syntax of ALGOL 68 [3]. Although SINTZOFF showed in [1] that every recursively enumerable set is generated by some such grammar, its use to the description of the full syntax of ALGOL 68 had to wait until recently [4]. The even more ambitious project of using such a grammar to give an integrated definition of both syntax and semantics of ALGOL 68 has been undertaken by the author but is still far from completion. Experience in these and other applications, e.g., to prove program correctness [5], have shown that although these grammars have the same generative power as Turing machines, they are much more manageable. An obvious question is the reason of this manageability. Certainly, a judicious choice of metanotions is of considerable value and in the big tasks, like the description of full-scale languages, a large number of metanotions are used. On the other hand, one might ask whether the ability to generate every recursively enumerable set requires so many metanotions.
20 citations
06 Jul 2010
TL;DR: Three open questions in the theory of regulated rewriting are addressed, including whether every permitting random context grammar has a non-erasing equivalent and whether permitting random Context Grammars have the same generative capacity as matrix grammars without appearance checking.
Abstract: Three open questions in the theory of regulated rewriting are addressed. The first is whether every permitting random context grammar has a non-erasing equivalent. The second asks whether the same is true for matrix grammars without appearance checking. The third concerns whether permitting random context grammars have the same generative capacity as matrix grammars without appearance checking.
The main result is a positive answer to the first question. For the other two, conjectures are presented. It is then deduced from the main result that at least one of the two holds.
20 citations