MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164948578 · doi:10.1162/089120103321337458

Word Reordering and a Dynamic Programming Beam Search Algorithm for Statistical Machine Translation

2003· article· en· W2164948578 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational Linguistics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWord (group theory)Task (project management)Machine translationVocabularyBeam searchWord error rateSentenceTranslation (biology)Artificial intelligenceNatural language processingDynamic programmingSearch algorithmSpeech recognitionSet (abstract data type)AlgorithmLinguisticsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we describe an efficient beam search algorithm for statistical machine translation based on dynamic programming (DP). The search algorithm uses the translation model presented in Brown et al. (1993). Starting from a DP-based solution to the traveling-salesman problem, we present a novel technique to restrict the possible word reorderings between source and target language in order to achieve an efficient search algorithm. Word reordering restrictions especially useful for the translation direction German to English are presented. The restrictions are generalized, and a set of four parameters to control the word reordering is introduced, which then can easily be adopted to new translation directions. The beam search procedure has been successfully tested on the Verbmobil task (German to English, 8,000-word vocabulary) and on the Canadian Hansards task (French to English, 100,000-word vocabulary). For the medium-sized Verbmobil task, a sentence can be translated in a few seconds, only a small number of search errors occur, and there is no performance degradation as measured by the word error criterion used in this article.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.301 · 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