  We present a resource for the task of FrameNet semantic frame disambiguation
of over 5,000 word-sentence pairs from the Wikipedia corpus. The annotations
were collected using a novel crowdsourcing approach with multiple workers per
sentence to capture inter-annotator disagreement. In contrast to the typical
approach of attributing the best single frame to each word, we provide a list
of frames with disagreement-based scores that express the confidence with which
each frame applies to the word. This is based on the idea that inter-annotator
disagreement is at least partly caused by ambiguity that is inherent to the
text and frames. We have found many examples where the semantics of individual
frames overlap sufficiently to make them acceptable alternatives for
interpreting a sentence. We have argued that ignoring this ambiguity creates an
overly arbitrary target for training and evaluating natural language processing
systems - if humans cannot agree, why would we expect the correct answer from a
machine to be any different? To process this data we also utilized an expanded
lemma-set provided by the Framester system, which merges FN with WordNet to
enhance coverage. Our dataset includes annotations of 1,000 sentence-word pairs
whose lemmas are not part of FN. Finally we present metrics for evaluating
frame disambiguation systems that account for ambiguity.
