MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2339504674

Learning Machine Translation from In-domain and Out-of-domain Data

2012· article· en· W2339504674 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marco Turchi, Cyril Goutte, Nello Cristianini

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine translationComputer sciencePhraseNatural language processingDomain (mathematical analysis)Artificial intelligenceTranslation (biology)Training setTest dataEvaluation of machine translationLanguage modelMachine learningExample-based machine translationMachine translation software usabilityMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of Phrase-Based Statistical Machine Translation (PBSMT) systems mostly depends on training data. Many papers have investigated how to create new resources in order to increase the size of the training corpus in an attempt to improve PBSMT performance. In this work, we analyse and characterize the way in which the in-domain and outof- domain performance of PBSMT is impacted when the amount of training data increases. Two different PBSMT systems, Moses and Portage, two of the largest parallel corpora, Giga (French-English) and UN (Chinese-English) datasets and several in- and out-of-domain test sets were used to build high quality learning curves showing consistent logarithmic growth in performance. These results are stable across language pairs, PBSMT systems and domains. We also analyse the respective impact of additional training data for estimating the language and translation models. Our proposed model approximates learning curves very well and indicates the translation model contributes about 30% more to the performance gain than the language model.

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)0.001
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 score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207