Question marks at the end swallowed about pysbd

[nipunsadvilkar]

Yes, I really need to come up with some assertion logic to map respective sentences to the original text. This is the main reason why I've been working on https://github.com/nipunsadvilkar/pySBD/tree/sentence-char-span branch because even if pysbd fails to find proper sentence. tok.is_sent_start would remain False and we will get an original text at the end

[nipunsadvilkar]

@danielkingai2 : Fixed above bug & have released char-span functionality today. Didn't release it yday since I wanted to add tests and update docs.

[nipunsadvilkar]

@danielkingai2 : Is given example - "Fig. ??" - actual sentence from some text? Seems like acronym with ?? would be less likely. Tried following:

In [2]: seg.segment('Fig. 20??')                                                                                                          
Out[2]: ['Fig.', '20??']

In [3]: seg.segment('Fig. 20 ??')                                                                                                         
Out[3]: ['Fig.', '20 ??']

In [4]: seg.segment('Fig. ??')                                                                                                            
Out[4]: ['Fig.']

I would need to add fig abbreviation to keep above tokens intact. Will look into it

[dakinggg]

It can result from text that is parsed from a pdf. The problem is that it becomes challenging to use the output if the output text doesn't match the input text (even if the sentence splitting is wrong, it is better to retain the original text). It looks like it only happens when the ?? is at the end of the input sequence and after a sentence split by pysbd (see examples below). Would it be easier to add a case to handle a sequence ending with ?? rather than special casing the abbreviation?

>>> segmenter.segment("This text talks about Fig. ??. It is a figure.")
['This text talks about Fig.', '??.', 'It is a figure.']
>>> segmenter.segment("This text talks about Fig. ??.")
['This text talks about Fig.', '??.']
>>> segmenter.segment("This text talks about Fig. ?? .")
['This text talks about Fig.', '?? .']
>>> segmenter.segment("This text talks about Fig. ?? which is a figure.")
['This text talks about Fig.', '?? which is a figure.']
>>> segmenter.segment("This text talks about Fig ??")
['This text talks about Fig ??']
>>> segmenter.segment("This text talks about Fig. ??")
['This text talks about Fig.']

[nipunsadvilkar]

Yes, I agree.

Can you please try out adding following line after https://github.com/nipunsadvilkar/pySBD/blob/master/pysbd/processor.py#L182

txt = re.sub(r'☇$', '??', txt)

[dakinggg]

seems better with that, at least it doesn't truncate the text

>>> segmenter.segment("This text talks about Fig. ??")
['This text talks about Fig.', '??']
>>> segmenter.segment("This text talks about Fig ??")
['This text talks about Fig ?', '?']

[dakinggg]

In the meantime, would you mind merging that fix you came up with?

[nipunsadvilkar]

Yes, sure!

And sorry for multiple bugs, since I ported it from https://github.com/diasks2/pragmatic_segmenter to python. My main criterion was getting golden rules tests pass.

Some of the issues (better to call it edge-cases) which you created earlier are not accounted for in pragmatic_segmenter. Though, I have tried to fix them in pysbd. Thanks for making pysbd more robust :)

[dakinggg]

No worries, I totally understand that you've ported the ruby gem! Definitely appreciate your responsiveness. Working with pdf parsed text causes all kinds of edge cases.

[nipunsadvilkar]

Yeah I concur, I myself work with lot of OCR text so know the pain of unformatted text

[dakinggg]

Nice!