MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972788481 · doi:10.3115/1599081.1599196

Tighter integration of rule-based and statistical MT in serial system combination

2008· article· en· W1972788481 on OpenAlexaff
Nicola Ueffing, Jens Stephan, Evgeny Matusov, Loïc Dugast, George Foster, Roland Kühn, Jean Sénellart, Jin Yang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine translationNISTTask (project management)Natural language processingPhraseLanguage modelArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent papers have described machine translation (MT) based on an automatic post-editing or serial combination strategy whereby the input language is first translated into the target language by a rule-based MT (RBMT) system, then the target language output is automatically post-edited by a phrase-based statistical machine translation (SMT) system. This approach has been shown to improve MT quality over RBMT or SMT alone. In this previous work, there was a very loose coupling between the two systems: the SMT system only had access to the final 1-best translations from RBMT. Furthermore, the previous work involved European language pairs and relatively small training corpora. In this paper, we describe a more tightly integrated serial combination for the Chinese-to-English MT task. We will present experimental evaluation results on the 2008 NIST constrained data track where a significant gain in terms of both automatic and subjective metrics is achieved through the tighter coupling of the two systems.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207