Controlled Translation in an Example-based Environment: What do Automatic Evaluation Metrics Tell Us?
A. Way, и N. Gough. Machine Translation, 19 (1):
1--36(2005)
Аннотация
Abstract This paper presents an extended, harmonised account of our previous work on integrating controlled language data in an Example-based Machine Translation system. Gough and Way in MT Summit pp. 133+óGé¼GC£140 (2003) focused on controlling the output text in a novel manner, while Gough and Way (9th Workshop of the EAMT, (2004a), pp. 73+óGé¼GC£81) sought to constrain the input strings according to controlled language specifications. Our original sub-sentential alignment algorithm could deal only with 1:1 matches, but subsequent refinements enabled n:m alignments to be captured. A direct consequence was that we were able to populate the system+óGé¼Gäós databases with more than six times as many potentially useful fragments. Together with two simple novel improvements +óGé¼GC£ correcting a small number of mistranslations in the lexicon, and allowing multiple translations in the lexicon +óGé¼GC£ translation quality improves considerably. We provide detailed automatic and human evaluations of a number of experiments carried out to test the quality of the system. We observe that our system outperforms the rule-based on-line system Logomedia on a range of automatic evaluation metrics, and that the +óGé¼-£best+óGé¼Gäó translation candidate is consistently highly ranked by our system. Finally, we note in a number of tests that the BLEU metric gives objectively different results than other automatic evaluation metrics and a manual evaluation. Despite these conflicting results, we observe a preference for controlling the source data rather than the target translations.
%0 Journal Article
%1 Way2005
%A Way, Andy
%A Gough, Nano
%D 2005
%J Machine Translation
%K Evaluaci{\'{o}}n,Traduccion autom{\'{a}}tica
%N 1
%P 1--36
%T Controlled Translation in an Example-based Environment: What do Automatic Evaluation Metrics Tell Us?
%U http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10590-005-1403-8
%V 19
%X Abstract This paper presents an extended, harmonised account of our previous work on integrating controlled language data in an Example-based Machine Translation system. Gough and Way in MT Summit pp. 133+óGé¼GC£140 (2003) focused on controlling the output text in a novel manner, while Gough and Way (9th Workshop of the EAMT, (2004a), pp. 73+óGé¼GC£81) sought to constrain the input strings according to controlled language specifications. Our original sub-sentential alignment algorithm could deal only with 1:1 matches, but subsequent refinements enabled n:m alignments to be captured. A direct consequence was that we were able to populate the system+óGé¼Gäós databases with more than six times as many potentially useful fragments. Together with two simple novel improvements +óGé¼GC£ correcting a small number of mistranslations in the lexicon, and allowing multiple translations in the lexicon +óGé¼GC£ translation quality improves considerably. We provide detailed automatic and human evaluations of a number of experiments carried out to test the quality of the system. We observe that our system outperforms the rule-based on-line system Logomedia on a range of automatic evaluation metrics, and that the +óGé¼-£best+óGé¼Gäó translation candidate is consistently highly ranked by our system. Finally, we note in a number of tests that the BLEU metric gives objectively different results than other automatic evaluation metrics and a manual evaluation. Despite these conflicting results, we observe a preference for controlling the source data rather than the target translations.
%Z Language: eng
@article{Way2005,
abstract = {Abstract This paper presents an extended, harmonised account of our previous work on integrating controlled language data in an Example-based Machine Translation system. Gough and Way in MT Summit pp. 133+{\'{o}}G{\'{e}}¼G{\c{C}}£140 (2003) focused on controlling the output text in a novel manner, while Gough and Way (9th Workshop of the EAMT, (2004a), pp. 73+{\'{o}}G{\'{e}}¼G{\c{C}}£81) sought to constrain the input strings according to controlled language specifications. Our original sub-sentential alignment algorithm could deal only with 1:1 matches, but subsequent refinements enabled n:m alignments to be captured. A direct consequence was that we were able to populate the system+{\'{o}}G{\'{e}}¼G{\"{a}}{\'{o}}s databases with more than six times as many potentially useful fragments. Together with two simple novel improvements +{\'{o}}G{\'{e}}¼G{\c{C}}£ correcting a small number of mistranslations in the lexicon, and allowing multiple translations in the lexicon +{\'{o}}G{\'{e}}¼G{\c{C}}£ translation quality improves considerably. We provide detailed automatic and human evaluations of a number of experiments carried out to test the quality of the system. We observe that our system outperforms the rule-based on-line system Logomedia on a range of automatic evaluation metrics, and that the +{\'{o}}G{\'{e}}¼-£best+{\'{o}}G{\'{e}}¼G{\"{a}}{\'{o}} translation candidate is consistently highly ranked by our system. Finally, we note in a number of tests that the BLEU metric gives objectively different results than other automatic evaluation metrics and a manual evaluation. Despite these conflicting results, we observe a preference for controlling the source data rather than the target translations.},
added-at = {2015-12-01T11:33:23.000+0100},
annote = {Language: eng},
author = {Way, Andy and Gough, Nano},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2c68c73eb68fe40278c06b42543e133b4/sofiagruiz92},
interhash = {c20661bc1103985b4fcde6b62bc0529c},
intrahash = {c68c73eb68fe40278c06b42543e133b4},
journal = {Machine Translation},
keywords = {Evaluaci{\'{o}}n,Traduccion autom{\'{a}}tica},
number = 1,
pages = {1--36},
timestamp = {2015-12-01T11:33:23.000+0100},
title = {{Controlled Translation in an Example-based Environment: What do Automatic Evaluation Metrics Tell Us?}},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10590-005-1403-8},
volume = 19,
year = 2005
}