MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W878889913

Multi-Metric Optimization Using Ensemble Tuning

2013· article· en· W878889913 on OpenAlexaff
Baskaran Sankaran, Anoop Sarkar, Kevin Duh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetric (unit)Computer sciencePareto principleMulti-objective optimizationMachine translationPerformance metricMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceMachine learningAlgorithmMathematicsEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines tuning for statistical ma-chine translation (SMT) with respect to mul-tiple evaluation metrics. We propose several novel methods for tuning towards multiple ob-jectives, including some based on ensemble decoding methods. Pareto-optimality is a nat-ural way to think about multi-metric optimiza-tion (MMO) and our methods can effectively combine several Pareto-optimal solutions, ob-viating the need to choose one. Our best performing ensemble tuning method is a new algorithm for multi-metric optimization that searches for Pareto-optimal ensemble models. We study the effectiveness of our methods through experiments on multiple as well as single reference(s) datasets. Our experiments show simultaneous gains across several met-rics (BLEU, RIBES), without any significant reduction in other metrics. This contrasts the traditional tuning where gains are usually lim-ited to a single metric. Our human evaluation results confirm that in order to produce better MT output, optimizing multiple metrics is bet-ter than optimizing only one. 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.281
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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207