File size: 78,170 Bytes
6fa4bc9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 | {
"paper_id": "P03-1012",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T09:13:44.521749Z"
},
"title": "A Probability Model to Improve Word Alignment",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Colin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cherry",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of Alberta Edmonton",
"location": {
"postCode": "T6G 2E8",
"settlement": "Alberta",
"country": "Canada"
}
},
"email": "colinc@cs.ualberta.ca"
},
{
"first": "Dekang",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of Alberta Edmonton",
"location": {
"postCode": "T6G 2E8",
"settlement": "Alberta",
"country": "Canada"
}
},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "Word alignment plays a crucial role in statistical machine translation. Word-aligned corpora have been found to be an excellent source of translation-related knowledge. We present a statistical model for computing the probability of an alignment given a sentence pair. This model allows easy integration of context-specific features. Our experiments show that this model can be an effective tool for improving an existing word alignment.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P03-1012",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "Word alignment plays a crucial role in statistical machine translation. Word-aligned corpora have been found to be an excellent source of translation-related knowledge. We present a statistical model for computing the probability of an alignment given a sentence pair. This model allows easy integration of context-specific features. Our experiments show that this model can be an effective tool for improving an existing word alignment.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "Word alignments were first introduced as an intermediate result of statistical machine translation systems (Brown et al., 1993) . Since their introduction, many researchers have become interested in word alignments as a knowledge source. For example, alignments can be used to learn translation lexicons (Melamed, 1996) , transfer rules (Carbonell et al., 2002; Menezes and Richardson, 2001) , and classifiers to find safe sentence segmentation points (Berger et al., 1996) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 107,
"end": 127,
"text": "(Brown et al., 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 304,
"end": 319,
"text": "(Melamed, 1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
},
{
"start": 337,
"end": 361,
"text": "(Carbonell et al., 2002;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 362,
"end": 391,
"text": "Menezes and Richardson, 2001)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 452,
"end": 473,
"text": "(Berger et al., 1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In addition to the IBM models, researchers have proposed a number of alternative alignment methods. These methods often involve using a statistic such as \u03c6 2 (Gale and Church, 1991) or the log likelihood ratio (Dunning, 1993) to create a score to measure the strength of correlation between source and target words. Such measures can then be used to guide a constrained search to produce word alignments (Melamed, 2000) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 158,
"end": 181,
"text": "(Gale and Church, 1991)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
},
{
"start": 210,
"end": 225,
"text": "(Dunning, 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 404,
"end": 419,
"text": "(Melamed, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "It has been shown that once a baseline alignment has been created, one can improve results by using a refined scoring metric that is based on the alignment. For example Melamed uses competitive linking along with an explicit noise model in (Melamed, 2000) to produce a new scoring metric, which in turn creates better alignments.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 240,
"end": 255,
"text": "(Melamed, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we present a simple, flexible, statistical model that is designed to capture the information present in a baseline alignment. This model allows us to compute the probability of an alignment for a given sentence pair. It also allows for the easy incorporation of context-specific knowledge into alignment probabilities.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "A critical reader may pose the question, \"Why invent a new statistical model for this purpose, when existing, proven models are available to train on a given word alignment?\" We will demonstrate experimentally that, for the purposes of refinement, our model achieves better results than a comparable existing alternative.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "We will first present this model in its most general form. Next, we describe an alignment algorithm that integrates this model with linguistic constraints in order to produce high quality word alignments. We will follow with our experimental results and discussion. We will close with a look at how our work relates to other similar systems and a discussion of possible future directions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In this section we describe our probability model. To do so, we will first introduce some necessary notation. Let E be an English sentence e 1 , e 2 , . . . , e m and let F be a French sentence f 1 , f 2 , . . . , f n . We define a link l(e i , f j ) to exist if e i and f j are a translation (or part of a translation) of one another. We define the null link l(e i , f 0 ) to exist if e i does not correspond to a translation for any French word in F . The null link l(e 0 , f j ) is defined similarly. An alignment A for two sentences E and F is a set of links such that every word in E and F participates in at least one link, and a word linked to e 0 or f 0 participates in no other links. If e occurs in E x times and f occurs in F y times, we say that e and f co-occur xy times in this sentence pair.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "We define the alignment problem as finding the alignment A that maximizes P (A|E, F ). This corresponds to finding the Viterbi alignment in the IBM translation systems. Those systems model P (F, A|E), which when maximized is equivalent to maximizing P (A|E, F ). We propose here a system which models P (A|E, F ) directly, using a different decomposition of terms.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "In the IBM models of translation, alignments exist as artifacts of which English words generated which French words. Our model does not state that one sentence generates the other. Instead it takes both sentences as given, and uses the sentences to determine an alignment. An alignment A consists of t links {l 1 , l 2 , . . . , l t }, where each l k = l(e i k , f j k ) for some i k and j k . We will refer to consecutive subsets of A as l j i = {l i , l i+1 , . . . , l j }. Given this notation, P (A|E, F ) can be decomposed as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "P (A|E, F ) = P (l t 1 |E, F ) = t k=1 P (l k |E, F, l k\u22121 1 )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "At this point, we must factor P (l k |E, F, l k\u22121 1 ) to make computation feasible. Let C k = {E, F, l k\u22121 1 } represent the context of l k . Note that both the context C k and the link l k imply the occurrence of e i k and f j k . We can rewrite P (l k |C k ) as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "P (l k |C k ) = P (l k , C k ) P (C k ) = P (C k |l k )P (l k ) P (C k , e i k , f j k ) = P (C k |l k ) P (C k |e i k , f j k ) \u00d7 P (l k , e i k , f j k ) P (e i k , f j k ) = P (l k |e i k , f j k ) \u00d7 P (C k |l k ) P (C k |e i k , f j k ) Here P (l k |e i k , f j k )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "is link probability given a cooccurrence of the two words, which is similar in spirit to Melamed's explicit noise model (Melamed, 2000) . This term depends only on the words involved directly in the link. The ratio P (C k |l k )",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 120,
"end": 135,
"text": "(Melamed, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "P (C k |e i k ,f j k )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "modifies the link probability, providing contextsensitive information.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Up until this point, we have made no simplifying assumptions in our derivation. Unfortunately,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "C k = {E, F, l k\u22121",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "1 } is too complex to estimate context probabilities directly. Suppose F T k is a set of context-related features such that P (l k |C k ) can be approximated by",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "P (l k |e i k , f j k , F T k ). Let C k = {e i k , f j k }\u222aF T k . P (l k |C k )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "can then be decomposed using the same derivation as above.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "P (l k |C k ) = P (l k |e i k , f j k ) \u00d7 P (C k |l k ) P (C k |e i k , f j k ) = P (l k |e i k , f j k ) \u00d7 P (F T k |l k ) P (F T k |e i k , f j k )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "In the second line of this derivation, we can drop e i k and f j k from C k , leaving only F T k , because they are implied by the events which the probabilities are conditionalized on. Now, we are left with the task of approximating P (F T k |l k ) and P (F T k |e i k , f j k ). To do so, we will assume that for all f t \u2208 F T k , f t is conditionally independent given either l k or (e i k , f j k ). This allows us to approximate alignment probability P (A|E, F ) as follows:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "t k=1 \uf8eb \uf8ed P (l k |e i k , f j k ) \u00d7 f t\u2208F T k P (f t|l k ) P (f t|e i k , f j k ) \uf8f6 \uf8f8",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "In any context, only a few features will be active. The inner product is understood to be only over those features f t that are present in the current context. This approximation will cause P (A|E, F ) to no longer be a well-behaved probability distribution, though as in Naive Bayes, it can be an excellent estimator for the purpose of ranking alignments.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "If we have an aligned training corpus, the probabilities needed for the above equation are quite easy to obtain. Link probabilities can be determined directly from |l k | (link counts) and |e i k , f j,k | (co-occurrence counts). For any co-occurring pair of words (e i k , f j k ), we check whether it has the feature f t. If it does, we increment the count of |f t, e i k , f j k |. If this pair is also linked, then we increment the count of |f t, l k |. Note that our definition of F T k allows for features that depend on previous links. For this reason, when determining whether or not a feature is present in a given context, one must impose an ordering on the links. This ordering can be arbitrary as long as the same ordering is used in training 1 and probability evaluation. A simple solution would be to order links according their French words. We choose to order links according to the link probability P (l k |e i k , f j k ) as it has an intuitive appeal of allowing more certain links to provide context for others.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "We store probabilities in two tables. The first table stores link probabilities P (l k |e i k , f j k ). It has an entry for every word pair that was linked at least once in the training corpus. Its size is the same as the translation table in the IBM models. The second table stores feature probabilities, P (f t|l k ) and P (f t|e i k , f j k ). For every linked word pair, this table has two entries for each active feature. In the worst case this table will be of size 2\u00d7|F T |\u00d7|E|\u00d7|F |. In practice, it is much smaller as most contexts activate only a small number of features.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "In the next subsection we will walk through a simple example of this probability model in action. We will describe the features used in our implementation of this model in Section 3.2. Figure 1 shows an aligned corpus consisting of one sentence pair. Suppose that we are concerned with only one feature f t that is active 2 for e i k and f j k if an adjacent pair is an alignment, i.e.,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 185,
"end": 193,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability Model",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "l(e i k \u22121 , f j k \u22121 ) \u2208 l k\u22121 1 or l(e i k +1 , f j k +1 ) \u2208 l k\u22121",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "An Illustrative Example",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "1 . This example would produce the probability tables shown in Table 1 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 63,
"end": 70,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "An Illustrative Example",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "Note how f t is active for the (a, v) link, and is not active for the (b, u) link. This is due to our selected ordering. Table 1 allows ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 121,
"end": 135,
"text": "Table 1 allows",
"ref_id": "TABREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "An Illustrative Example",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "e i k f j k |l k | |e i k , f j k | P (l k |e i k , f j k ) b u 1 1 1 a f 0 1 2 1 2 e 0 v 1 2 1 2 a v 1 4 1 4 (b) Feature Counts e i k f j k |f t, l k | |f t, e i k , f j k | a v 1 1 (c) Feature Probabilities e i k f j k P (f t|l k ) P (f t|e i k , f j k ) a v 1 1 4 P (A|E, F ) = P (l(b, u)|b, u)\u00d7 P (l(a, f 0 )|a, f 0 )\u00d7 P (l(e 0 , v)|e 0 , v)\u00d7 P (l(a, v)|a, v) P (f t|l(a,v)) P (f t|a,v) = 1 \u00d7 1 2 \u00d7 1 2 \u00d7 1 4 \u00d7 1 1 4 = 1 4 3 Word-Alignment Algorithm",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "An Illustrative Example",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "In this section, we describe a world-alignment algorithm guided by the alignment probability model derived above. In designing this algorithm we have selected constraints, features and a search method in order to achieve high performance. The model, however, is general, and could be used with any instantiation of the above three factors. This section will describe and motivate the selection of our constraints, features and search method. The input to our word-alignment algorithm consists of a pair of sentences E and F , and the dependency tree T E for E. T E allows us to make use of features and constraints that are based on linguistic intuitions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "An Illustrative Example",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "The reader will note that our alignment model as described above has very few factors to prevent undesirable alignments, such as having all French words align to the same English word. To guide the model to correct alignments, we employ two constraints to limit our search for the most probable alignment. The first constraint is the one-to-one constraint (Melamed, 2000) : every word (except the null words e 0 and f 0 ) participates in exactly one link.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 356,
"end": 371,
"text": "(Melamed, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constraints",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "The second constraint, known as the cohesion constraint (Fox, 2002) , uses the dependency tree (Mel'\u010duk, 1987) of the English sentence to restrict possible link combinations. Given the dependency tree T E , the alignment can induce a dependency tree for F . The cohesion constraint requires that this induced dependency tree does not have any crossing dependencies. The details about how the cohesion constraint is implemented are outside the scope of this paper. 3 Here we will use a simple example to illustrate the effect of the constraint. Consider the partial alignment in Figure 2 . When the system attempts to link of and de, the new link will induce the dotted dependency, which crosses a previously induced dependency between service and donn\u00e9es. Therefore, of and de will not be linked. ",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 56,
"end": 67,
"text": "(Fox, 2002)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 95,
"end": 110,
"text": "(Mel'\u010duk, 1987)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 578,
"end": 586,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Constraints",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "In this section we introduce two types of features that we use in our implementation of the probability model described in Section 2. The first feature 3 The algorithm for checking the cohesion constraint is presented in a separate paper which is currently under review. Figure 3 : Feature Extraction Example type f t a concerns surrounding links. It has been observed that words close to each other in the source language tend to remain close to each other in the translation (Vogel et al., 1996; Ker and Change, 1997) . To capture this notion, for any word pair (e i , f j ), if a link l(e i , f j ) exists where i \u2212 2 \u2264 i \u2264 i + 2 and j \u2212 2 \u2264 j \u2264 j + 2, then we say that the feature f t a (i\u2212i , j \u2212j , e i ) is active for this context. We refer to these as adjacency features.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 152,
"end": 153,
"text": "3",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 477,
"end": 497,
"text": "(Vogel et al., 1996;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 498,
"end": 519,
"text": "Ker and Change, 1997)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 271,
"end": 279,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Features",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "The second feature type f t d uses the English parse tree to capture regularities among grammatical relations between languages. For example, when dealing with French and English, the location of the determiner with respect to its governor 4 is never swapped during translation, while the location of adjectives is swapped frequently. For any word pair (e i , f j ), let e i be the governor of e i , and let rel be the relationship between them. If a link l(e i , f j ) exists, then we say that the feature f t d (j \u2212 j , rel) is active for this context. We refer to these as dependency features.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Features",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Take for example Figure 3 which shows a partial alignment with all links completed except for those involving 'the'. Given this sentence pair and English parse tree, we can extract features of both types to assist in the alignment of the 1 . The word pair (the 1 , l ) will have an active adjacency feature f t a (+1, +1, host) as well as a dependency feature f t d (\u22121, det). These two features will work together to increase the probability of this correct link. In contrast, the incorrect link (the 1 , les) will have only f t d (+3, det), which will work to lower the link probability, since most determiners are located be-fore their governors.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 17,
"end": 25,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Features",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Due to our use of constraints, when seeking the highest probability alignment, we cannot rely on a method such as dynamic programming to (implicitly) search the entire alignment space. Instead, we use a best-first search algorithm (with constant beam and agenda size) to search our constrained space of possible alignments. A state in this space is a partial alignment. A transition is defined as the addition of a single link to the current state. Any link which would create a state that does not violate any constraint is considered to be a valid transition. Our start state is the empty alignment, where all words in E and F are linked to null. A terminal state is a state in which no more links can be added without violating a constraint. Our goal is to find the terminal state with highest probability.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Search",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "For the purposes of our best-first search, nonterminal states are evaluated according to a greedy completion of the partial alignment. We build this completion by adding valid links in the order of their unmodified link probabilities P (l|e, f ) until no more links can be added. The score the state receives is the probability of its greedy completion. These completions are saved for later use (see Section 4.2).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Search",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "As was stated in Section 2, our probability model needs an initial alignment in order to create its probability tables. Furthermore, to avoid having our model learn mistakes and noise, it helps to train on a set of possible alignments for each sentence, rather than one Viterbi alignment. In the following subsections we describe the creation of the initial alignments used for our experiments, as well as our sampling method used in training.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "We produce an initial alignment using the same algorithm described in Section 3, except we maximize summed \u03c6 2 link scores (Gale and Church, 1991) , rather than alignment probability. This produces a reasonable one-to-one word alignment that we can refine using our probability model.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 123,
"end": 146,
"text": "(Gale and Church, 1991)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Initial Alignment",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "Our use of the one-to-one constraint and the cohesion constraint precludes sampling directly from all possible alignments. These constraints tie words in such a way that the space of alignments cannot be enumerated as in IBM models 1 and 2 (Brown et al., 1993) . Taking our lead from IBM models 3, 4 and 5, we will sample from the space of those highprobability alignments that do not violate our constraints, and then redistribute our probability mass among our sample.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 240,
"end": 260,
"text": "(Brown et al., 1993)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Alignment Sampling",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "At each search state in our alignment algorithm, we consider a number of potential links, and select between them using a heuristic completion of the resulting state. Our sample S of possible alignments will be the most probable alignment, plus the greedy completions of the states visited during search. It is important to note that any sampling method that concentrates on complete, valid and high probability alignments will accomplish the same task.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Alignment Sampling",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "When collecting the statistics needed to calculate P (A|E, F ) from our initial \u03c6 2 alignment, we give each s \u2208 S a uniform weight. This is reasonable, as we have no probability estimates at this point. When training from the alignments produced by our model, we normalize P (s|E, F ) so that s\u2208S P (s|E, F ) = 1. We then count links and features in S according to these normalized probabilities.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Alignment Sampling",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "We adopted the same evaluation methodology as in (Och and Ney, 2000) , which compared alignment outputs with manually aligned sentences. Och and Ney classify manual alignments into two categories: Sure (S) and Possible (P ) (S\u2286P ). They defined the following metrics to evaluate an alignment A:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 49,
"end": 68,
"text": "(Och and Ney, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Results",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "recall = |A\u2229S| |S| precision = |A\u2229P | |P | alignment error rate (AER) = |A\u2229S|+|A\u2229P | |S|+|P |",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Results",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "We trained our alignment program with the same 50K pairs of sentences as (Och and Ney, 2000) and tested it on the same 500 manually aligned sentences. Both the training and testing sentences are from the Hansard corpus. We parsed the training and testing corpora with Minipar. 5 We then ran the training procedure in Section 4 for three iterations. We conducted three experiments using this methodology. The goal of the first experiment is to compare the algorithm in Section 3 to a state-of-theart alignment system. The second will determine the contributions of the features. The third experiment aims to keep all factors constant except for the model, in an attempt to determine its performance when compared to an obvious alternative. Table 2 compares the results of our algorithm with the results in (Och and Ney, 2000) , where an HMM model is used to bootstrap IBM Model 4. The rows IBM-4 F\u2192E and IBM-4 E\u2192F are the results obtained by IBM Model 4 when treating French as the source and English as the target or vice versa. The row IBM-4 Intersect shows the results obtained by taking the intersection of the alignments produced by IBM-4 E\u2192F and IBM-4 F\u2192E. The row IBM-4 Refined shows results obtained by refining the intersection of alignments in order to increase recall.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 73,
"end": 92,
"text": "(Och and Ney, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 277,
"end": 278,
"text": "5",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 805,
"end": 824,
"text": "(Och and Ney, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 739,
"end": 746,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": "TABREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Results",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Our algorithm achieved over 44% relative error reduction when compared with IBM-4 used in either direction and a 25% relative error rate reduction when compared with IBM-4 Refined. It also achieved a slight relative error reduction when compared with IBM-4 Intersect. This demonstrates that we are competitive with the methods described in (Och and Ney, 2000) . In Table 2 , one can see that our algorithm is high precision, low recall. This was expected as our algorithm uses the one-to-one constraint, which rules out many of the possible alignments present in the evaluation data.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 340,
"end": 359,
"text": "(Och and Ney, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 365,
"end": 372,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": "TABREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Comparison to state-of-the-art",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "5 available at http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/\u02dclindek/minipar.htm ) 88.9 84.6 13.1 without features 93.7 84.8 10.5 with f t d only 95.6 85.4 9.3 with f t a only 95.9 85.8 9.0 with f t a and f t d 95.7 86.4 8.7 Table 3 shows the contributions of features to our algorithm's performance. The initial (\u03c6 2 ) row is the score for the algorithm (described in Section 4.1) that generates our initial alignment. The without features row shows the score after 3 iterations of refinement with an empty feature set. Here we can see that our model in its simplest form is capable of producing a significant improvement in alignment quality. The rows with f t d only and with f t a only describe the scores after 3 iterations of training using only dependency and adjacency features respectively. The two features provide significant contributions, with the adjacency feature being slightly more important. The final row shows that both features can work together to create a greater improvement, despite the independence assumptions made in Section 2.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 61,
"end": 62,
"text": ")",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 205,
"end": 212,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": "TABREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Comparison to state-of-the-art",
"sec_num": "5.1"
},
{
"text": "Even though we have compared our algorithm to alignments created using IBM statistical models, it is not clear if our model is essential to our performance. This experiment aims to determine if we could have achieved similar results using the same initial alignment and search algorithm with an alternative model. Without using any features, our model is similar to IBM's Model 1, in that they both take into account only the word types that participate in a given link. IBM Model 1 uses P (f |e), the probability of f being generated by e, while our model uses P (l|e, f ), the probability of a link existing between e and f . In this experiment, we set Model 1 translation probabilities according to our initial \u03c6 2 alignment, sampling as we described in Section 4.2. We then use the n j=1 P (f j |e a j ) to evaluate candidate alignments in a search that is otherwise identical to our algorithm. We ran Model 1 refinement for three iterations and Table 4 : P (l|e, f ) vs. P (f |e)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 950,
"end": 957,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Model Evaluation",
"sec_num": "5.3"
},
{
"text": "Prec Rec AER initial (\u03c6 2 ) 88.9 84.6 13.1 P (l|e, f ) model 93.7 84.8 10.5 P (f |e) model 89.2 83.0 13.7",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Algorithm",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "recorded the best results that it achieved. It is clear from Table 4 that refining our initial \u03c6 2 alignment using IBM's Model 1 is less effective than using our model in the same manner. In fact, the Model 1 refinement receives a lower score than our initial alignment.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 61,
"end": 68,
"text": "Table 4",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Algorithm",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "When viewed with no features, our probability model is most similar to the explicit noise model defined in (Melamed, 2000) . In fact, Melamed defines a probability distribution P (links(u, v)|cooc(u, v), \u03bb + , \u03bb \u2212 ) which appears to make our work redundant. However, this distribution refers to the probability that two word types u and v are linked links(u, v) times in the entire corpus. Our distribution P (l|e, f ) refers to the probability of linking a specific co-occurrence of the word tokens e and f . In Melamed's work, these probabilities are used to compute a score based on a probability ratio. In our work, we use the probabilities directly.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 107,
"end": 122,
"text": "(Melamed, 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability models",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "By far the most prominent probability models in machine translation are the IBM models and their extensions. When trying to determine whether two words are aligned, the IBM models ask, \"What is the probability that this English word generated this French word?\" Our model asks instead, \"If we are given this English word and this French word, what is the probability that they are linked?\" The distinction is subtle, yet important, introducing many differences. For example, in our model, E and F are symmetrical. Furthermore, we model P (l|e, f ) and P (l|e, f ) as unrelated values, whereas the IBM model would associate them in the translation probabilities t(f |e) and t(f |e) through the constraint f t(f |e) = 1. Unfortunately, by conditionalizing on both words, we eliminate a large inductive bias. This prevents us from starting with uniform probabilities and estimating parameters with EM. This is why we must supply the model with a noisy initial alignment, while IBM can start from an unaligned corpus.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability models",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "In the IBM framework, when one needs the model to take new information into account, one must create an extended model which can base its parameters on the previous model. In our model, new information can be incorporated modularly by adding features. This makes our work similar to maximum entropy-based machine translation methods, which also employ modular features. Maximum entropy can be used to improve IBM-style translation probabilities by using features, such as improvements to P (f |e) in (Berger et al., 1996) . By the same token we can use maximum entropy to improve our estimates of P (l k |e i k , f j k , C k ). We are currently investigating maximum entropy as an alternative to our current feature model which assumes conditional independence among features.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 500,
"end": 521,
"text": "(Berger et al., 1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Probability models",
"sec_num": "6.1"
},
{
"text": "There have been many recent proposals to leverage syntactic data in word alignment. Methods such as (Wu, 1997) , (Alshawi et al., 2000) and (Lopez et al., 2002 ) employ a synchronous parsing procedure to constrain a statistical alignment. The work done in (Yamada and Knight, 2001 ) measures statistics on operations that transform a parse tree from one language into another.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 100,
"end": 110,
"text": "(Wu, 1997)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF16"
},
{
"start": 113,
"end": 135,
"text": "(Alshawi et al., 2000)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 140,
"end": 159,
"text": "(Lopez et al., 2002",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
},
{
"start": 256,
"end": 280,
"text": "(Yamada and Knight, 2001",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Grammatical Constraints",
"sec_num": "6.2"
},
{
"text": "The alignment algorithm described here is incapable of creating alignments that are not one-to-one. The model we describe, however is not limited in the same manner. The model is currently capable of creating many-to-one alignments so long as the null probabilities of the words added on the \"many\" side are less than the probabilities of the links that would be created. Under the current implementation, the training corpus is one-to-one, which gives our model no opportunity to learn many-to-one alignments.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Future Work",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "We are pursuing methods to create an extended algorithm that can handle many-to-one alignments. This would involve training from an initial alignment that allows for many-to-one links, such as one of the IBM models. Features that are related to multiple links should be added to our set of feature types, to guide intelligent placement of such links.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Future Work",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "We have presented a simple, flexible, statistical model for computing the probability of an alignment given a sentence pair. This model allows easy integration of context-specific features. Our experiments show that this model can be an effective tool for improving an existing word alignment.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "8"
},
{
"text": "In our experiments, the ordering is not necessary during training to achieve good performance.2 Throughout this paper we will assume that null alignments are special cases, and do not activate or participate in features unless otherwise stated in the feature description.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The parent node in the dependency tree.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Learning dependency translation models as collections of finite state head transducers. Computational Linguistics",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Hiyan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Alshawi",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Srinivas",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bangalore",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Shona",
"middle": [],
"last": "Douglas",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "",
"volume": "26",
"issue": "",
"pages": "45--60",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hiyan Alshawi, Srinivas Bangalore, and Shona Douglas. 2000. Learning dependency translation models as col- lections of finite state head transducers. Computa- tional Linguistics, 26(1):45-60.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Adam",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Berger",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Stephen",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Della Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Vincent",
"middle": [
"J Della"
],
"last": "Pietra",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1996,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "22",
"issue": "1",
"pages": "39--71",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Adam L. Berger, Stephen A. Della Pietra, and Vincent J. Della Pietra. 1996. A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing. Computational Linguis- tics, 22(1):39-71.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "The mathematics of statistical machine translation: Parameter estimation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [
"F"
],
"last": "Brown",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "V",
"middle": [
"S A"
],
"last": "Della Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "V",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Della Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Mercer",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "19",
"issue": "2",
"pages": "263--312",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "P. F. Brown, V. S. A. Della Pietra, V. J. Della Pietra, and R. L. Mercer. 1993. The mathematics of statistical machine translation: Parameter estimation. Computa- tional Linguistics, 19(2):263-312.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Automatic rule learning for resource-limited mt",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Jaime",
"middle": [],
"last": "Carbonell",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Katharina",
"middle": [],
"last": "Probst",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Erik",
"middle": [],
"last": "Peterson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Christian",
"middle": [],
"last": "Monson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Alon",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lavie",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ralf",
"middle": [],
"last": "Brown",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Lori",
"middle": [],
"last": "Levin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proceedings of AMTA-02",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1--10",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jaime Carbonell, Katharina Probst, Erik Peterson, Chris- tian Monson, Alon Lavie, Ralf Brown, and Lori Levin. 2002. Automatic rule learning for resource-limited mt. In Proceedings of AMTA-02, pages 1-10.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ted",
"middle": [],
"last": "Dunning",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1993,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "19",
"issue": "1",
"pages": "61--74",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ted Dunning. 1993. Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguis- tics, 19(1):61-74, March.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Phrasal cohesion and statistical machine translation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Heidi",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Fox",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proceedings of EMNLP-02",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "304--311",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Heidi J. Fox. 2002. Phrasal cohesion and statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of EMNLP-02, pages 304-311.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Identifying word correspondences in parallel texts",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Gale",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [
"W"
],
"last": "Church",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": ";",
"middle": [],
"last": "Darpa",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Morgan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kaufmann",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1991,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 4th Speech and Natural Language Workshop",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "152--157",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "W.A. Gale and K.W. Church. 1991. Identifying word correspondences in parallel texts. In Proceedings of the 4th Speech and Natural Language Workshop, pages 152-157. DARPA, Morgan Kaufmann.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Evaluating translational correspondence using annotation projection",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Rebecca",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hwa",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Philip",
"middle": [],
"last": "Resnik",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Amy",
"middle": [],
"last": "Weinberg",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Okan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kolak",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proceeding of ACL-02",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "392--399",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Rebecca Hwa, Philip Resnik, Amy Weinberg, and Okan Kolak. 2002. Evaluating translational correspondence using annotation projection. In Proceeding of ACL-02, pages 392-399.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Aligning more words with high precision for small bilingual corpora",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sue",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jason",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Ker",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Change",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1997,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing",
"volume": "2",
"issue": "",
"pages": "63--96",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sue J. Ker and Jason S. Change. 1997. Aligning more words with high precision for small bilingual cor- pora. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Lan- guage Processing, 2(2):63-96, August.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Word-level alignment for multilingual resource acquisition",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Adam",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lopez",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nossal",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Rebecca",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hwa",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Philip",
"middle": [],
"last": "Resnik",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Workshop on Linguistic Knowledge Acquisition and Representation: Bootstrapping Annotated Language Data",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Adam Lopez, Michael Nossal, Rebecca Hwa, and Philip Resnik. 2002. Word-level alignment for multilingual resource acquisition. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Linguistic Knowledge Acquisition and Representa- tion: Bootstrapping Annotated Language Data.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Automatic construction of clean broad-coverage translation lexicons",
"authors": [
{
"first": "I",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Melamed",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1996,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 2nd Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "125--134",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "I. Dan Melamed. 1996. Automatic construction of clean broad-coverage translation lexicons. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas, pages 125-134, Mon- treal.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Models of translational equivalence among words",
"authors": [
{
"first": "I",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Melamed",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "26",
"issue": "2",
"pages": "221--249",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "I. Dan Melamed. 2000. Models of translational equiv- alence among words. Computational Linguistics, 26(2):221-249, June.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Dependency syntax: theory and practice",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Igor",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1987,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Igor A. Mel'\u010duk. 1987. Dependency syntax: theory and practice. State University of New York Press, Albany.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "A bestfirst alignment algorithm for automatic extraction of transfer mappings from bilingual corpora",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Arul",
"middle": [],
"last": "Menezes",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Stephen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Richardson",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Workshop on Data-Driven Machine Translation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Arul Menezes and Stephen D. Richardson. 2001. A best- first alignment algorithm for automatic extraction of transfer mappings from bilingual corpora. In Proceed- ings of the Workshop on Data-Driven Machine Trans- lation.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "Improved statistical alignment models",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Franz",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Hermann",
"middle": [],
"last": "Och",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ney",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "440--447",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Franz J. Och and Hermann Ney. 2000. Improved sta- tistical alignment models. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 440-447, Hong Kong, China, Octo- ber.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Hmm-based word alignment in statistical translation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vogel",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ney",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Tillmann",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1996,
"venue": "Proceedings of COLING-96",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "836--841",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "S. Vogel, H. Ney, and C. Tillmann. 1996. Hmm-based word alignment in statistical translation. In Proceed- ings of COLING-96, pages 836-841, Copenhagen, Denmark, August.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Stochastic inversion transduction grammars and bilingual parsing of parallel corpora",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Dekai",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1997,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "23",
"issue": "3",
"pages": "374--403",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Dekai Wu. 1997. Stochastic inversion transduction grammars and bilingual parsing of parallel corpora. Computational Linguistics, 23(3):374-403.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "A syntax-based statistical translation model",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Kenji",
"middle": [],
"last": "Yamada",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kevin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Knight",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2001,
"venue": "Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "523--530",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kenji Yamada and Kevin Knight. 2001. A syntax-based statistical translation model. In Meeting of the Associ- ation for Computational Linguistics, pages 523-530.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"text": "us to calculate the probability of this alignment as:",
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null
},
"FIGREF2": {
"text": "An Example of Cohesion Constraint",
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null
},
"TABREF0": {
"text": "",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td>: Example Probability Tables</td></tr><tr><td>(a) Link Counts and Probabilities</td></tr></table>",
"html": null
},
"TABREF1": {
"text": "the host discovers all the devices",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td/><td/><td/><td>obj</td><td/></tr><tr><td>det</td><td>subj</td><td/><td>pre det</td><td/></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>4 5</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td/><td>1 2</td><td>3</td><td>4 5</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td/><td colspan=\"4\">l' h\u00f4te rep\u00e8re tous les p\u00e9riph\u00e9riques</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">the host</td><td colspan=\"2\">locate all the</td><td>peripherals</td></tr></table>",
"html": null
},
"TABREF2": {
"text": "Comparison with(Och and Ney, 2000)",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td>Method</td><td colspan=\"2\">Prec Rec AER</td></tr><tr><td>Ours</td><td>95.7 86.4</td><td>8.7</td></tr><tr><td>IBM-4 F\u2192E</td><td colspan=\"2\">80.5 91.2 15.6</td></tr><tr><td>IBM-4 E\u2192F</td><td colspan=\"2\">80.0 90.8 16.0</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">IBM-4 Intersect 95.7 85.6</td><td>9.0</td></tr><tr><td>IBM-4 Refined</td><td colspan=\"2\">85.9 92.3 11.7</td></tr></table>",
"html": null
},
"TABREF3": {
"text": "Evaluation of Features",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td>Algorithm</td><td>Prec Rec AER</td></tr><tr><td>initial (\u03c6 2</td><td/></tr></table>",
"html": null
}
}
}
} |