MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Semisupervised Learning for Machine Translation

2008· book-chapter· en· W4381325804 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nicola Ueffing, Gholamreza Haffari, Anoop Sarkar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe MIT Press eBooks · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAdvanced Research Projects AgencyDefense Advanced Research Projects Agency
KeywordsTranslation (biology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingMachine translationMachine learningChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Statistical machine translation systems are usually trained on large amounts of bilingual text, used to learn a translation model, and also on large amounts of monolingual text in the target language, used to train a language model.In this chapter we explore the use of semisupervised methods for the effective use of monolingual data from the source language in order to improve translation quality.In particular, we use monolingual source language data from the same domain as the test set (without directly using the test set itself) and use semisupervised methods for model adaptation to the test set domain.We propose several algorithms with this aim, and present the strengths and weaknesses of each one.We present detailed experimental evaluations using French-English and Chinese-English data and show that under some settings translation quality can be improved.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.013

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe MIT Press eBooksSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207