MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2756726036 · doi:10.18653/v1/w17-4732

NRC Machine Translation System for WMT 2017

2017· article· en· W2756726036 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chi-kiu Lo, Boxing Chen, Colin Cherry, George Foster, Samuel Larkin, Darlene Stewart, Roland Kühn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsGoogle (Canada)National Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine translationComputer scienceTranslation (biology)Machine translation systemArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the machine translation systems developed at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) for the Russian-English and Chinese-English news translation tasks of the Second Conference on Machine Translation (WMT 2017).We conducted several experiments to explore the best baseline settings for neural machine translation (NMT).In the Russian-English task, to our surprise, our bestperforming system is one that rescores phrase-based statistical machine translation outputs using NMT rescoring features.On the other hand, in the Chinese-English task, which has far more parallel training data, NMT is able to outperform SMT significantly.The NRC MT systems is the best constrained system in Russian-English (out of nine participants) and the fourth best constrained system in Chinese-English (out of twenty participants) in WMT 2017 human evaluation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.059

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207