Papers › Improving Neural RST Parsing Model with Silver Agreement Subtrees
Improving Neural RST Parsing Model with Silver Agreement Subtrees
Naoki Kobayashi, Tsutomu Hirao, Hidetaka Kamigaito, Manabu Okumura, Masaaki Nagata
Most of the previous Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) parsing methods are based on supervised learning such as neural networks, that require an annotated corpus of sufficient size and quality. However, the RST Discourse Treebank (RST-DT), the benchmark corpus for RST parsing in English, is small due to the costly annotation of RST trees. The lack of large annotated training data causes poor performance especially in relation labeling. Therefore, we propose a method for improving neural RST parsing models by exploiting silver data, i.e., automatically annotated data. We create large-scale silver data from an unlabeled corpus by using a state-of-the-art RST parser. To obtain high-quality silver data, we extract agreement subtrees from RST trees for documents built using the RST parsers. We then pre-train a neural RST parser with the obtained silver data and fine-tune it on the RST-DT. Experimental results show that our method achieved the best micro-F1 scores for Nuclearity and Relation at 75.0 and 63.2, respectively. Furthermore, we obtained a remarkable gain in the Relation score, 3.0 points, against the previous state-of-the-art parser.
Code
No code repository is listed for this paper in the archive or in Syntology's graph.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
1 archive task tag without a task page not shown.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discourse Parsing | RST-DT | Top-down Span-based Parser with Silver Agreement Subtrees (ensemble) | RST-Parseval (Full) | 62.6 | #27 of 40 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Discourse Parsing | RST-DT | Top-down Span-based Parser with Silver Agreement Subtrees (ensemble) | RST-Parseval (Nuclearity) | 75.0 | #27 of 40 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Discourse Parsing | RST-DT | Top-down Span-based Parser with Silver Agreement Subtrees (ensemble) | RST-Parseval (Relation) | 63.2 | #27 of 40 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Discourse Parsing | RST-DT | Top-down Span-based Parser with Silver Agreement Subtrees (ensemble) | RST-Parseval (Span) | 87.1 | #27 of 40 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Discourse Parsing | RST-DT | Top-down Span-based Parser with Silver Agreement Subtrees | RST-Parseval (Full) | 61.8 | #28 of 40 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Discourse Parsing | RST-DT | Top-down Span-based Parser with Silver Agreement Subtrees | RST-Parseval (Nuclearity) | 74.7 | #28 of 40 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Discourse Parsing | RST-DT | Top-down Span-based Parser with Silver Agreement Subtrees | RST-Parseval (Relation) | 62.5 | #28 of 40 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Discourse Parsing | RST-DT | Top-down Span-based Parser with Silver Agreement Subtrees | RST-Parseval (Span) | 86.8 | #28 of 40 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections