Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
That's a bad error message, but the problem is that you should be calling the
predict command like this:
morfette predict MODEL-DIR < TEST-FILE > ANALYZED-TEST-DATA
Note that there is only one argument to the command (MODEL-DIR). The input is
read from standard input, the output written to standard output.
More details: http://sites.google.com/site/morfetteweb/quick-start
Original comment by pitekus
on 15 Dec 2011 at 9:59
Original comment by pitekus
on 15 Dec 2011 at 11:06
Hey everyone,
I'm having this error everytime I'm using the wrong dir as morfette's model
argument.
The original poster said he coudn't get the train function to work.... maybe he
could get the src and check the contrib directory which contains some usefull
wrappers.
Original comment by djame.seddah@gmail.com
on 15 Dec 2011 at 11:12
This error should definitely not happen if the number of arguments is correct
(even if the directory is wrong). Can you check and show an example?
Original comment by pitekus
on 15 Dec 2011 at 12:32
Hi Grzegorz,
I've been able to reproduce this bug which occurs in two cases
1° there're less than 2 fields of data per line (typical case : a punct which
lacks a lemma in a treebank (PONCT .) instead of (PONCT .@.) so if one rewrites
the leaf to get word lemma pos, there will be only tw o fields and bang.
2° there're more than 3 fields (typical case : the (X (SYM @)) line in the
PTB which is lemmatized @^@ but as a scriot which works for french and italian
(tr "@" "^" | tr '^' '\t') will generate 4 fields
@^@ SYM -> ^^^ SYM > \t\t\tSYM and bang morfette crashes (one night it took
me to catch on my own data)
Solutions:
1) the best : make morfette more explicit (like display the faulting line and
some context)
2) run a checker script
http://pauillac.inria.fr/~seddah/check.pl
Original comment by djame.seddah@gmail.com
on 19 Dec 2011 at 2:49
Attachments:
Are we talking about the non-exhaustive pattern match bug here?
Original comment by pitekus
on 19 Dec 2011 at 8:25
Yes, but as far as I understand it's not really a bug. this error is caused by
wrongly formated data. The error message should just be more informative (and
provides some context about the data that generate this error)
Original comment by djame.seddah@gmail.com
on 19 Dec 2011 at 12:51
OK I'll reopen this a new issue, since it's about input format and not the
argument list to commands (error msgs for commands have been fixed already)
Original comment by pitekus
on 19 Dec 2011 at 3:24
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
katefulg...@gmail.com
on 15 Dec 2011 at 7:46