headers
Yuri Tambovtsev | 1 Apr 2010 11:12
Picon

Peer Reviewing is a burning problem in linguistics

Dear Corpora colleagues, I started the discussion on Peer Reviewing and I am quite happy about it. It looks that it is a burning question in linguistics. I agree with those who say that Peer Reviewing results are not satisfactory. It usually forces the author to go along the way he does not like even if the article is published with changes. Peer Reviewing makes the article more primitive and common. One should remove all innovations and new theories. It makes the article more common and not so interesting. It also makes the waiting process too long while our life is so short= Can we afford it? I feel it is a waiste of time of your life. Recently I received two reviews from Linguistica Uralica. The first reviewer wrote that that article has too much new original information and therefore the readers shall not understand it. The other reviewer wrote that there was no new information and therefore it shall not be interesting for the readers. I wonder if the editor read these two contradictory statements before sending them to me? The edotors of the great linguistics journal LANGUAGE usually answered me that my articles are not in the scope of their journal as if I wrote my articles not about languages but about how to collect potatoes in the fields. It was always so. I think they had too many areticles to get published. So they had to reject 90% articles any way. Surely, I published my articles which were rejected in other journals. I am sure the peer reviewing process must be reconsidered. The reviewers must answer for what they wrote. The only way is to open the names of the reviewers. Why should I hide my name if I gave a negative review? If I think the article is bad, then I must say it openly. Otherwise, it is not logical. Otherwise, all the speakers at conferences should also cover their faces if they want to criticize other linguists. Now that the reviewers know that their names are under cover , they write what their LEFT LEG  wants. They do not answer for what they write. In courts all judges and lawyers who want to condem a criminal must also cover their faces. But they do not do it. They have great risks, but still they do not hide their names, they sign the papers with their true names. Why should the reviewer cover their names? If they really believe in what they write, they should openly say so. So, I wonder if the general linguistic public support my preposal not to let the reviewers hide their names. Looking forward to hearing from you soon to yutamb <at> mail.ru  Yours sincerely Yuri Tambovtsev
_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Alex Boulton | 1 Apr 2010 11:40
Picon

Re: Peer Reviewing is a burning problem in linguistics

Talking of a waiste of time...



Le 01/04/2010 11:12, Yuri Tambovtsev a écrit :
Dear Corpora colleagues, I started the discussion on Peer Reviewing and I am quite happy about it. It looks that it is a burning question in linguistics. I agree with those who say that Peer Reviewing results are not satisfactory. It usually forces the author to go along the way he does not like even if the article is published with changes. Peer Reviewing makes the article more primitive and common. One should remove all innovations and new theories. It makes the article more common and not so interesting. It also makes the waiting process too long while our life is so short= Can we afford it? I feel it is a waiste of time of your life. Recently I received two reviews from Linguistica Uralica. The first reviewer wrote that that article has too much new original information and therefore the readers shall not understand it. The other reviewer wrote that there was no new information and therefore it shall not be interesting for the readers. I wonder if the editor read these two contradictory statements before sending them to me? The edotors of the great linguistics journal LANGUAGE usually answered me that my articles are not in the scope of their journal as if I wrote my articles not about languages but about how to collect potatoes in the fields. It was always so. I think they had too many areticles to get published. So they had to reject 90% articles any way. Surely, I published my articles which were rejected in other journals. I am sure the peer reviewing process must be reconsidered. The reviewers must answer for what they wrote. The only way is to open the names of the reviewers. Why should I hide my name if I gave a negative review? If I think the article is bad, then I must say it openly. Otherwise, it is not logical. Otherwise, all the speakers at conferences should also cover their faces if they want to criticize other linguists. Now that the reviewers know that their names are under cover , they write what their LEFT LEG  wants. They do not answer for what they write. In courts all judges and lawyers who want to condem a criminal must also cover their faces. But they do not do it. They have great risks, but still they do not hide their names, they sign the papers with their true names. Why should the reviewer cover their names? If they really believe in what they write, they should openly say so. So, I wonder if the general linguistic public support my preposal not to let the reviewers hide their names. Looking forward to hearing from you soon to yutamb <at> mail.ru  Yours sincerely Yuri Tambovtsev
_______________________________________________ Corpora mailing list Corpora <at> uib.no http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora

--

 

                                                                  Alex Boulton
                                                                Nancy-Université
                                                          boulton <at> univ-nancy2.fr

 

                        homepage: http://arche.univ-nancy2.fr/course/view.php?id=967

Equipe CRAPEL, ATILF/CNRS                                                                                    ERUDI
Tél :  03.54.50.51.06                                                                                Tél : 03.54.50.46.70
http://www.univ-nancy2.fr/CRAPEL/                                      http://www.univ-nancy2.fr/erudi

 

                     Tous les articles des Mélanges CRAPEL sont disponibles
                                      gratuitement en ligne sous format pdf :

                                     http://revues.univ-nancy2.fr/melangesCrapel/

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Thomas Koller | 1 Apr 2010 12:07
Picon

Experienced Researcher position in Multimedia and Multimodality Resources and Technology (reannounced)

The Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen (Netherlands) invites applications for a
position as Experienced Researcher (ER) in Multimedia and Multimodality Resources and Technology.

Application deadline: 30. April 2010. Candidates who have already applied for this position in February
2010 need not reapply.

The 2-year position involves participation in the EU project CLARA - Common Language Resources and their
Applications, which is a Marie Curie Initial Training Network receiving funding from the European
Commission's 7th Framework Programme (cf. http://clara.uib.no/; http://ec.europa.eu/research/mariecurieactions/).

The specific position involves participation in the CLARA subproject Multimedia and Multimodal
Communication Modeling, which is a cooperation between the Technical Group at the MPI and Københavns
Universitet (UCPH). The overall aim of the subproject is the creation of multimedia and multimodal
resources and advanced software based processing components in order to study human communicative
behavior empirically. This will require the design and development of new types of speech and/or video
processing modules and of adequate annotation schemes. The projects at the MPI and at UCPH will
complement each other.

The successful applicant will be familiar and comfortable with the design and development of software in
high-level programming languages and the use of well-known digital signal processing techniques and packages.

Applicants should hold a university degree (Masters/diploma or equivalent with additional four years of
research experience or a PhD), and must be within the first five years of their research careers
(calculated - in full-time equivalents - since being awarded the degree which allows to embark on a Ph.D,
i.e. these 5 years include your Ph.D. period!). We expect the successful applicant to take up the position
as soon as possible.

The salary is roughly EUR 53,000 per year. The income is taxable and all compulsory deductions under
national law will be made. There are additional mobility and travel allowances (yearly allowance) as
well as a career exploratory allowance. There is a budget to cover participation costs, such as
attendance at CLARA events abroad. There is an intention to continue the work after the 2-years CLARA
project phase.

Women are particularly encouraged to apply.

For further information about the available position (including salary enquiries) and project, please
contact Thomas Koller, thomas.koller <at> mpi.nl

Applications should be submitted via e-mail to Thomas Koller, thomas.koller <at> mpi.nl 

Before applying for this position, please read thoroughly the full call at http://clara.uib.no/vacancies/er-vacancy-at-mpi/

--

-- 
Dr Thomas Koller
Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics
Wundtlaan 1
6525 XD Nijmegen
e-mail: thomas.koller <at> mpi.nl

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mcenery, Tony | 1 Apr 2010 12:57
Picon

Re: Peer Reviewing is a burning problem in linguistics

I think it would be best for this list to focus on corpus linguistics - while interesting to some I am sure,
there must be a better forum for discussions of issues such as 'peer review'.

________________________________

From: corpora-bounces <at> uib.no on behalf of Yuri Tambovtsev
Sent: Thu 01/04/2010 12:12
To: corpora <at> uib.no
Subject: [Corpora-List] Peer Reviewing is a burning problem in linguistics

Dear Corpora colleagues, I started the discussion on Peer Reviewing and I am quite happy about it. It looks
that it is a burning question in linguistics. I agree with those who say that Peer Reviewing results are not
satisfactory. It usually forces the author to go along the way he does not like even if the article is
published with changes. Peer Reviewing makes the article more primitive and common. One should remove
all innovations and new theories. It makes the article more common and not so interesting. It also makes
the waiting process too long while our life is so short= Can we afford it? I feel it is a waiste of time of your
life. Recently I received two reviews from Linguistica Uralica. The first reviewer wrote that that
article has too much new original information and therefore the readers shall not understand it. The
other reviewer wrote that there was no new information and therefore it shall not be interesting for the
readers. I wonder if the editor read these two contradictory statements before sending them to me? The
edotors of the great linguistics journal LANGUAGE usually answered me that my articles are not in the
scope of their journal as if I wrote my articles not about languages but about how to collect potatoes in the
fields. It was always so. I think they had too many areticles to get published. So they had to reject 90%
articles any way. Surely, I published my articles which were rejected in other journals. I am sure the peer
reviewing process must be reconsidered. The reviewers must answer for what they wrote. The only way is to
open the names of the reviewers. Why should I hide my name if I gave a negative review? If I think the article
is bad, then I must say it openly. Otherwise, it is not logical. Otherwise, all the speakers at conferences
should also cover their faces if they want to criticize other linguists. Now that the reviewers know that
their names are under cover , they write what their LEFT LEG  wants. They do not answer for what they write. In
courts all judges and lawyers who want to condem a criminal must also cover their faces. But they do not do
it. They have great risks, but still they do not hide their names, they sign the papers with their true
names. Why should the reviewer cover their names? If they really believe in what they write, they should
openly say so. So, I wonder if the general linguistic public support my preposal not to let the reviewers
hide their names. Looking forward to hearing from you soon to yutamb <at> mail.ru  Yours sincerely Yuri Tambovtsev

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Eric Atwell | 1 Apr 2010 13:22
Picon
Favicon

LEEDS Uni: 2 fully-funded Phd Studentships in Computer Science


Project Title: 2 fully-funded Phd Studentships in Computer Science

Two fully-funded home/EU PhD studentships are available in the
School of Computing (http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/research)
at the University of Leeds, UK.

The Natural Language Processing Group (http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nlp)
is especially keen to encourage students in Natural Language Processing
to apply.  The Leeds NLP group currently has particular strengths and
interests in the following six areas:

(i)  Automatic detection and summarisation of opinions or emotions (also
       multimodal)
(ii) Automatic detection of terrorist activities
(iii) Arabic Natural Language processing
(iv) Automatic processing of discourse relations and anaphora resolution
(v)  Semantic tagging of patient medical records
(vi) Automatic processing of figurative language

Any applicant will compete for the position(s) with applicants in all
other subject areas in the School of Computing. The awards will be made
on applicant merit only.

Funding: The two studentships are funded by an EPSRC Doctoral Training
grant and will start from 1.9.2010 or as soon as possible thereafter.
Each of the two studentships is funded for 3.5 years and covers
Home/EU fees and maintenance at the standard EPSRC rate
(currently 13,490 British pounds per annum). There is also an allowance
for travel and equipment.

Requirements: All PhD candidates should have or expect to obtain a
first class or good 2.1 honours degree in computer science,
(computational) linguistics or related areas. A background in NLP is
necessary. The successful candidates should fulfil the eligibility
criteria for EPSRC funding through UK/EU nationality and residency status.

Application:  See www.leeds.ac.uk/students/apply_research.htm
for online applications. The application deadline is the 30 April 2010.
Contact Katja Markert (markert <at> comp.leeds.ac.uk) for academic questions
and rsadmit <at> comp.leeds.ac.uk for administrative ones.

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Raffaella Bernardi | 1 Apr 2010 13:34
Picon

Re: Task-based Dialogue Comparable Corpora

Hi,

At the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, we have had on line a  
multilingual chatter bot (English, Italian and German) -- BoB (Bolzano  
Bot) -- to answer user questions about the Library of FUB:

http://web.inf.unibz.it/bob/?popup=yes&language=en

It has been online since October 2008 for English, since February 2009  
for German and since September 2009 for Italian.

We are now working on cleaning up the logs from personal names for  
privacy reasons. Let me know if they can be of help. We have also  
annotated the logs with info such as: Topic Continuation, Topic Shift,  
etc.. More detailed info will be posted as soon as the logs are  
available --- hopefully by end of May.

The project has been carried out by KRDB members together with the  
University Library staff.

Raffaella

==========================================================
Erasmus Mundus European Masters Programs in
Computational Logic http://www.computational-logic.eu
Language and Communication Technologies http://www.inf.unibz.it/mcs/lct/
==========================================================

-------------------------------------------------------
Raffaella Bernardi | Free University of Bozen-Bolzano |
Faculty of Computer Science |
P.zza Domenicani, 3 | I-39100 Bolzano | Room: 2.19 |
Phone:+39 0471 0 16122 | Fax: +39 0471 0 16009
http://www.inf.unibz.it/~bernardi
--------------------------------------------------------

On Mar 28, 2010, at 7:08 PM, Konstantina Garoufi wrote:

> Dear Carlos,
>
> the GIVE-2 corpus of Giving Instructions in Virtual Environments  
> (currently in English and German) may be useful to you:
>
> http://www.give-challenge.org/research/page.php?id=give-2-corpus
>
> Best,
> Konstantina
>
>
> Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 03:13:05 -0400
> From: Carlos Gómez Gallo <cgallo <at> fas.harvard.edu>
> Subject: [Corpora-List] Task-based Dialogue Comparable Corpora
> To: corpora <corpora <at> uib.no>
>
> Dear Corpora-list members,
> I am working on compiling a list of task-based dialogue corpora such
> as ATIS, Maptask, and TRAINS. In the type of data set I am interested,
> there are usually two interlocutors (or one human interlocutor and a
> dialogue system) who collaborate in executing a common task. I am
> particularly interested in corpora that has been collected in two
> languages or more. In other words, that the experiment/task/session
> was run in more than one language. This corpus would allow the
> comparison of linguistic forms of those languages in contrast (hence,
> comparable corpus; and not parallel corpus which I take it to mean the
> translation of a corpus into at least another language).
> Your responses are greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> Carlos Gómez Gallo
> _______________________________________________
> Corpora mailing list
> Corpora <at> uib.no
> http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Justin Washtell | 1 Apr 2010 14:01
Picon
Favicon
Gravatar

"Peer Reviewing" gets flamed in linguistics

Dear corpora members,

Where to begin?

To what extent are we able to separate langue from parole in corpora (Ferdinand de Saussure, 1986)? By that -
and I may be mis-using the terms - I mean that structure which is considered "belonging to the language",
and that which is considered "belonging to the thing being said". Do statistical techniques allow us to
separate these (as a perhaps naive example: those things which are "significantly" recurrent in the
corpus being langue, the remaining "noise" being parole)? Or does corpus-based research to date seem to
indicate that these things are inseperable? And if they are inseparable, how then can we design systems
which exploit a given langage (langue) to interpret or convey a given message (parole).

(this is a serious question - please feel free to change the subject line if it fails to sustain any amusement)

Justin Washtell
University of Leeds

________________________________________
From: corpora-bounces <at> uib.no [corpora-bounces <at> uib.no] On Behalf Of Mcenery, Tony [eiaamme <at> exchange.lancs.ac.uk]
Sent: 01 April 2010 11:57
To: corpora <at> uib.no
Subject: Re: [Corpora-List] Peer Reviewing is a burning problem in      linguistics

I think it would be best for this list to focus on corpus linguistics - while interesting to some I am sure,
there must be a better forum for discussions of issues such as 'peer review'.

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
WHITELOCK, Pete | 1 Apr 2010 14:02
Favicon

Jobs: Language Engineers, Oxford University Press

Language Engineers (2 positions)
Oxford University Press

Dictionaries, Academic Division
Dictionaries, English Language Teaching Division
 
Exciting opportunities to help shape the future of dictionaries with the world’s leading dictionary publisher.
 
The successful candidates will join one of our language engineering teams dedicated to digital data enhancement and development of tools and resources for the preparation of dictionaries for print, online publishing, and external licensing.
 
The vacancy within Academic Division would suit a candidate with a few years experience. That within the ELT Division would be more suitable for a recent graduate at first degree or Masters level.
 
Candidates should have experience of working with language data in a computational context, an enthusiasm for developing and applying innovative techniques in linguistic analysis for dictionary development, and an awareness of the issues involved in processing data in diverse languages. A practical, problem-solving attitude is essential. Expertise in any of the following would be an advantage:
 
  • Perl, Python, Java, or similar
  • The analysis of Arabic text (for the Academic position)
  • XML, XSLT and related technologies
  • Statistical Language Processing
  • Advanced website development
 
Both posts are based in Oxford. Competitive salary dependent on skills and experience.

OUP offers excellent benefits including:
 
  • final salary pension scheme
  • 25 days' holiday
  • subsidized staff restaurant
  • 50% discount off OUP books
  • flexible start/finish times

    To apply for one of these jobs, visit:
 
 
If you wish to be considered for either position, please apply for one and mention your interest in the other in your covering letter.
 
 
Pete Whitelock
Head of Language Engineering, Dictionaries
Reference Department
Academic Division
Oxford University Press
 
 
 

Oxford University Press (UK) Disclaimer

This message is confidential. You should not copy it or disclose its contents to anyone. You may use and apply the information for the intended purpose only. OUP does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. Any views or opinions presented are those of the author only and not of OUP. If this email has come to you in error, please delete it, along with any attachments. Please note that OUP may intercept incoming and outgoing email communications.

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Graeme Hirst | 1 Apr 2010 15:12
Picon
Favicon

CfP: Workshop on Computational Approaches to Synonymy, Helsinki, October 2010

Workshop on Computational Approaches to Synonymy
at the Symposium on Re-Thinking Synonymy, Helsinki, 28-30 October 2010
http://www.linguistics.fi/synonymy/


Many problems and applications in computational linguistics and natural language processing implicitly invoke, in various forms, the concept of synonymy or identity of meaning.  In one way or another, they involve either determining identity (or non-identity) of meaning in different surface forms or creating different surface forms for a single meaning. 

For example, paraphrase recognition is an important component of the more-general problem of recognizing textual entailment.  Textual tailoring and personalization seeks to find the most effective linguistic realization of a message for a particular user; automatically simplifying texts and creating stylistic variations are special cases of this.  Lexical choice in text generation tries to find the best word for a given meaning and to discriminate it from other words that are close in meaning but not synonymous in the context.   Cross-lingual document retrieval and other cross-lingual applications such as, in particular, machine translation conflate the ideas of synonymy and translation equivalence.

But while there has been a large amount of research on computational methods for determining degree of similarity in lexical meaning and for recognizing paraphrase, little attention has been given to theoretical considerations of synonymy.  Mostly, it is treated as a boolean property (two words are or aren't in the same synset; two sentences are or aren't mutual entailments) with little thought of any theoretical underpinning.

On the other hand, the real-world linguistic problems that natural language processing addresses provide useful test cases for linguistic theories of synonymy, and the computational methods developed are de facto theories of synonymy even if not intended as such.

This workshop will explore computational approaches to synonymy, with an emphasis on explicating their implicit theoretical notions and their implications for linguistic theory.  Papers are solicited on the following topics:

**  Computational theories of lexical, phrasal, and sentential synonymy.
**  Principled methods of paraphrase recognition and generation.
**  Principled methods of text tailoring and stylistic variation.
**  Cross-lingual synonymy and machine translation.
**  Beyond the synset: Principles of synonymy in computational lexical resources

The following are not appropriate except insofar as they explicitly address the topics above:

**  Yet another paraphrase-recognition or textual entailment system.
**  Yet another lexical similarity metric.
**  Yet another personalization or text-simplification system.

Submissions:  Abstracts of up to 500 words should be submitted (as pdf attachments) to synonymy <at> cs.toronto.edu by 30 June 2010.  Decisions on acceptance will be notified by 15 July 2010.

Organizers:  Graeme Hirst (University of Toronto); Kentaro Inui (Tohoku University); Manfred Stede (University of Potsdam).


_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Roser Morante | 2 Apr 2010 10:17
Picon
Favicon

Workshop on Advances in Bio Text Mining : Extended deadline

------- Apologies for multiple postings -------

======================================================
Final Call for Abstracts, Extended Deadline : April 10
======================================================

Workshop BioTM-2010: Advances in Bio Text Mining
May 10-11, 2010, Ghent, Belgium
http://www.clips.ua.ac.be/BioTM2010/index.html

On popular demand, we have decided to postpone the final submission deadline to *Saturday, April 10, 2010*

============================================================

Abstracts are invited for the two-day workshop to be held in Ghent on the 10th and 11th of May 2010.
Authors of selected abstracts will present their work in a five minute bullet talk and their posters will be
presented in a poster session. Submitted abstracts will be reviewed by the organising committee. 

The best abstracts will be published in an abstract supplement of BMC Bioinformatics (http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcbioinformatics/).
Submission deadline: April 10, 2010. 

============================================================

The program of the workshop includes: 
- an extensive tutorial on Bio Text Mining by Martin Krallinger
- invited talks by leading scientists in the field: Sampo Pyysalo, Kevin Cohen and Filip Ginter
- invited talks by experienced scientists from industry: Jean-Marc Neefs, Luc Dehaspe and Maté Ongenaert

============================================================

Text mining has become indispensible in many biological and biomedical sciences. Having to keep up with an
increasing number of publications, text mining techniques enable retrieval and analysis of large
amounts of documents in a fully automated fashion. They allow for extraction of facts described in the
literature that have not yet been recorded in databases, thus providing a necessary tool to obtain a
complete overview of all available knowledge.

Recently, the application of text mining and natural language processing techniques to the biological
and medical sciences has recieved increasing interest. In addition to many new workshops and
conferences arising in this domain, recently also a number of community-wide tasks were conducted to
benchmark text mining techniques on specific challenges (e.g. BioCreative, BioNLP Shared Task, ...).

By discussing the latest developments and potentially new applications in text mining amongst
scientists in both academia and industry, this workshop aims to provide a broad view on text mining tools
in biology and biomedicine. We are reaching out to a broad public, including researchers with an interest
in text mining but with little or no experience in this domain. To this end, the workshop will start with an
extensive tutorial on text mining in the bio-sciences, providing sufficient background knowledge for novices.

Next, a number of keynote talks will be given by leading scientists, presenting the latest advances in the
field. Furthermore, participants are highly encouraged to submit an abstract describing their own
work. They will be given the opportunity to present this work in 5min flash presentations, as well as to
present a poster during the coffee and lunch breaks. The best abstracts will be published in an abstract
supplement of BMC Bioinformatics (http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcbioinformatics/). 

Finally, we plan on having a round-table discussion about the broader applicability of text-mining tools
in the biological sciences, trying to bridge the gap between theoretical algorithms and experimental work.

============================================================

SUBMISSIONS: SCOPE

Submissions should present work related to any aspect of biomedical text mining and bioinformatics.
Additionally, we strongly encourage submissions that describe shortcomings of current existing
techniques, tools, or resources, in order to detect problematic issues and work towards their
improvement. 

SUBMISSIONS: INSTRUCTIONS

An abstract of maximum 400 words with at most 1 table or figure should be submitted to the following e-mail
address in pdf format:
biotm2010 at gmail dot com
Submission is blind.
Detailed formatting instructions can be found at http://www.clips.ua.ac.be/BioTM2010/call.html

============================================================

IMPORTANT DATES

10 April 2010		Submission deadline
15 April 2010		Notification of acceptance
30 April 2010 		Camera-ready abstracts due 
10-11 May 2010		Workshop in Ghent 

============================================================

ORGANISATION / PROGRAM COMMITTEE

Yvan Saeys
Thomas Abeel
Sofie Van Landeghem

Bioinformatics and Evolutionary Genomics group
VIB Department of Plant Systems Biology
Ghent University, Belgium

Walter Daelemans
Roser Morante
Vincent Van Asch

CLiPS - Text Mining Group
Faculty of Arts
University of Antwerp, Belgium

Roser Morante

Senior Researcher
CLiPS - Computational Linguistics
University of Antwerp
http://www.clips.ua.ac.be/~roser
Roser.Morante <at> ua.ac.be

_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora <at> uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane