MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285105102 · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.acl-long.17

CipherDAug: Ciphertext based Data Augmentation for Neural Machine Translation

2022· article· en· W4285105102 on OpenAlexafffund
Nishant Kambhatla, Logan Born, Anoop Sarkar

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistère de la Défense Nationale
KeywordsComputer scienceCiphertextMachine translationPlaintextArtificial neural networkLeverage (statistics)Artificial intelligenceSource codeTransformerAlgorithmEncryptionProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel data-augmentation technique for neural machine translation based on ROT-k ciphertexts.ROT-k is a simple letter substitution cipher that replaces a letter in the plaintext with the kth letter after it in the alphabet.We first generate multiple ROT-k ciphertexts using different values of k for the plaintext which is the source side of the parallel data.We then leverage this enciphered training data along with the original parallel data via multi-source training to improve neural machine translation.Our method, CipherDAug, uses a co-regularization-inspired training procedure, requires no external data sources other than the original training data, and uses a standard Transformer to outperform strong data augmentation techniques on several datasets by a significant margin.This technique combines easily with existing approaches to data augmentation, and yields particularly strong results in low-resource settings.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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207