1 resultado para Stormont House Agreement
em Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Filtro por publicador
- Repository Napier (1)
- Aberystwyth University Repository - Reino Unido (3)
- Applied Math and Science Education Repository - Washington - USA (1)
- Aquatic Commons (6)
- ARCA - Repositório Institucional da FIOCRUZ (1)
- Archive of European Integration (102)
- Archivo Digital para la Docencia y la Investigación - Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad del País Vasco (5)
- Avian Conservation and Ecology - Eletronic Cientific Hournal - Écologie et conservation des oiseaux: (2)
- Biblioteca Digital da Câmara dos Deputados (1)
- Biblioteca Digital da Produção Intelectual da Universidade de São Paulo (BDPI/USP) (2)
- Biblioteca Digital de la Universidad Católica Argentina (1)
- Brock University, Canada (69)
- Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (8)
- CentAUR: Central Archive University of Reading - UK (66)
- Center for Jewish History Digital Collections (35)
- Chapman University Digital Commons - CA - USA (3)
- Chinese Academy of Sciences Institutional Repositories Grid Portal (5)
- Cochin University of Science & Technology (CUSAT), India (5)
- Comissão Econômica para a América Latina e o Caribe (CEPAL) (24)
- CORA - Cork Open Research Archive - University College Cork - Ireland (4)
- CUNY Academic Works (2)
- Dalarna University College Electronic Archive (4)
- Department of Computer Science E-Repository - King's College London, Strand, London (1)
- Digital Archives@Colby (11)
- DRUM (Digital Repository at the University of Maryland) (7)
- Duke University (3)
- eResearch Archive - Queensland Department of Agriculture; Fisheries and Forestry (5)
- Gallica, Bibliotheque Numerique - Bibliothèque nationale de France (French National Library) (BnF), France (1)
- Greenwich Academic Literature Archive - UK (8)
- Helda - Digital Repository of University of Helsinki (13)
- Indian Institute of Science - Bangalore - Índia (9)
- Instituto Politécnico do Porto, Portugal (3)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1)
- Ministerio de Cultura, Spain (5)
- Plymouth Marine Science Electronic Archive (PlyMSEA) (2)
- QUB Research Portal - Research Directory and Institutional Repository for Queen's University Belfast (153)
- Queensland University of Technology - ePrints Archive (137)
- Repositório Científico do Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa - Portugal (2)
- Repositório digital da Fundação Getúlio Vargas - FGV (10)
- Repositório Institucional UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista "Julio de Mesquita Filho" (22)
- Research Open Access Repository of the University of East London. (1)
- RUN (Repositório da Universidade Nova de Lisboa) - FCT (Faculdade de Cienecias e Technologia), Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL), Portugal (1)
- School of Medicine, Washington University, United States (13)
- South Carolina State Documents Depository (51)
- Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, Mexico (1)
- Universidad del Rosario, Colombia (9)
- Universidad Politécnica Salesiana Ecuador (1)
- Universidade de Lisboa - Repositório Aberto (1)
- Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN) (1)
- Universitat de Girona, Spain (3)
- Universitätsbibliothek Kassel, Universität Kassel, Germany (1)
- Université de Lausanne, Switzerland (2)
- Université de Montréal, Canada (13)
- University of Michigan (9)
- University of Washington (1)
- WestminsterResearch - UK (4)
Resumo:
The computer science technique of computational complexity analysis can provide powerful insights into the algorithm-neutral analysis of information processing tasks. Here we show that a simple, theory-neutral linguistic model of syntactic agreement and ambiguity demonstrates that natural language parsing may be computationally intractable. Significantly, we show that it may be syntactic features rather than rules that can cause this difficulty. Informally, human languages and the computationally intractable Satisfiability (SAT) problem share two costly computional mechanisms: both enforce agreement among symbols across unbounded distances (Subject-Verb agreement) and both allow ambiguity (is a word a Noun or a Verb?).