<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="H93-1011">
  <Title>SURVEY OF THE MESSAGE UNDERSTANDING CONFERENCES</Title>
  <Section position="3" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
1. INTRODUCTION
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> Much has happened since the last time a paper appeared in the ARPA workshop proceedings about the Message Understanding Conferences \[11\]. The evaluation methodology has been changing steadily, and more demanding information extraction tasks have been defined. In response to the challenges of the evaluation task and metrics, researchers have developed robust and efficient methods for working with large corpora and have confronted prevalent text analysis issues that have so far conswained performance.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> These challenges have also resulted in a critical rethinking of assumptions concerning the ideal system to submit for evaluation. Is it a &amp;quot;generic&amp;quot; natural language system with in-depth analysis capabilities and a well-defined internal representation language designed to accomodate the translation of various kinds of textual input into various kinds of output? Or is it one that uses only shallow processing techniques and does not presume to be suitable for language processing tasks other than information extraction?</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>