Improving Parallel Data Identification using Iteratively Refined Sentence Alignments and Bilingual Mappings of Pre-trained Language Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The National Research Council of Canada's team submissions to the parallel corpus filtering task at the Fifth Conference on Machine Translation are based on two key components: (1) iteratively refined statistical sentence alignments for extracting sentence pairs from document pairs and (2) a crosslingual semantic textual similarity metric based on a pretrained multilingual language model, XLM-RoBERTa, with bilingual mappings learnt from a minimal amount of clean parallel data for scoring the parallelism of the extracted sentence pairs.The translation quality of the neural machine translation systems trained and fine-tuned on the parallel data extracted by our submissions improved significantly when compared to the organizers' LASER-based baseline, a sentence-embedding method that worked well last year.For re-aligning the sentences in the document pairs (component 1), our statistical approach has outperformed the current state-of-the-art neural approach in this low-resource context.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".