MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2250907725

Improved Reordering for Phrase-Based Translation using Sparse Features

2013· article· en· W2250907725 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Colin Cherry

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine translationPhraseArtificial intelligenceTranslation (biology)Natural language processingPrinciple of maximum entropyEntropy (arrow of time)Pattern recognition (psychology)Speech recognition
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There have been many recent investigations into methods to tune SMT systems using large numbers of sparse features. However, there have not been nearly so many examples of helpful sparse features, especially for phrasebased systems. We use sparse features to address reordering, which is often considered a weak point of phrase-based translation. Using a hierarchical reordering model as our baseline, we show that simple features coupling phrase orientation to frequent words or wordclusters can improve translation quality, with boosts of up to 1.2 BLEU points in Chinese-English and 1.8 in Arabic-English. We compare this solution to a more traditional maximum entropy approach, where a probability model with similar features is trained on wordaligned bitext. We show that sparse decoder features outperform maximum entropy handily, indicating that there are major advantages to optimizing reordering features directly for BLEU with the decoder in the loop. 1

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations45
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207