MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283790576 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v36i10.21340

From Fully Trained to Fully Random Embeddings: Improving Neural Machine Translation with Compact Word Embedding Tables

2022· article· en· W4283790576 on OpenAlexaff
Krtin Kumar, Peyman Passban, Mehdi Rezagholizadeh, Yiusing Lau

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityThomson Reuters (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEmbeddingMachine translationWord (group theory)Word embeddingNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceContext (archaeology)Artificial neural networkTask (project management)Key (lock)Language modelSpeech recognitionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embedding matrices are key components in neural natural language processing (NLP) models that are responsible to provide numerical representations of input tokens (i.e. words or subwords). In this paper, we analyze the impact and utility of such matrices in the context of neural machine translation (NMT). We show that detracting syntactic and semantic information from word embeddings and running NMT systems with random embeddings is not as damaging as it initially sounds. We also show how incorporating only a limited amount of task-specific knowledge from fully-trained embeddings can boost the performance NMT systems. Our findings demonstrate that in exchange for negligible deterioration in performance, any NMT model can be run with partially random embeddings. Working with such structures means a minimal memory requirement as there is no longer need to store large embedding tables, which is a significant gain in industrial and on-device settings. We evaluated our embeddings in translating English into German and French and achieved a 5.3x compression rate. Despite having a considerably smaller architecture, our models in some cases are even able to outperform state-of-the-art baselines.

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)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207