MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123551014 · doi:10.3115/1220835.1220839

Segment choice models

2006· article· en· W2123551014 on OpenAlexaff
Roland Kühn, Denis Yuen, Michel Simard, Patrick Paul, George Foster, Eric Joanis, Howard Johnson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerplexityComputer sciencePhraseDistortion (music)Machine translationArtificial intelligenceDecoding methodsMetric (unit)Probabilistic logicSentenceTranslation (biology)Natural language processingSequence (biology)Language modelSpeech recognitionAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new approach to distortion (phrase reordering) in phrase-based machine translation (MT). Distortion is modeled as a sequence of choices during translation. The approach yields trainable, probabilistic distortion models that are global: they assign a probability to each possible phrase reordering. These "segment choice" models (SCMs) can be trained on "segment-aligned" sentence pairs; they can be applied during decoding or rescoring. The approach yields a metric called "distortion perplexity" ("disperp") for comparing SCMs offline on test data, analogous to perplexity for language models. A decision-tree-based SCM is tested on Chinese-to-English translation, and outperforms a baseline distortion penalty approach at the 99% confidence level.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.253
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207