File size: 76,323 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 | {
"paper_id": "P07-1003",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T08:49:31.877376Z"
},
"title": "Tailoring Word Alignments to Syntactic Machine Translation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "John",
"middle": [],
"last": "Denero",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of California",
"location": {
"settlement": "Berkeley"
}
},
"email": "denero@berkeley.edu"
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Klein",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of California",
"location": {
"settlement": "Berkeley"
}
},
"email": "klein@cs.berkeley.edu"
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "Extracting tree transducer rules for syntactic MT systems can be hindered by word alignment errors that violate syntactic correspondences. We propose a novel model for unsupervised word alignment which explicitly takes into account target language constituent structure, while retaining the robustness and efficiency of the HMM alignment model. Our model's predictions improve the yield of a tree transducer extraction system, without sacrificing alignment quality. We also discuss the impact of various posteriorbased methods of reconciling bidirectional alignments.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P07-1003",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "Extracting tree transducer rules for syntactic MT systems can be hindered by word alignment errors that violate syntactic correspondences. We propose a novel model for unsupervised word alignment which explicitly takes into account target language constituent structure, while retaining the robustness and efficiency of the HMM alignment model. Our model's predictions improve the yield of a tree transducer extraction system, without sacrificing alignment quality. We also discuss the impact of various posteriorbased methods of reconciling bidirectional alignments.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "Syntactic methods are an increasingly promising approach to statistical machine translation, being both algorithmically appealing (Melamed, 2004; Wu, 1997) and empirically successful (Chiang, 2005; Galley et al., 2006) . However, despite recent progress, almost all syntactic MT systems, indeed statistical MT systems in general, build upon crude legacy models of word alignment. This dependence runs deep; for example, Galley et al. (2006) requires word alignments to project trees from the target language to the source, while Chiang (2005) requires alignments to induce grammar rules.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 130,
"end": 145,
"text": "(Melamed, 2004;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
},
{
"start": 146,
"end": 155,
"text": "Wu, 1997)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 183,
"end": 197,
"text": "(Chiang, 2005;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 198,
"end": 218,
"text": "Galley et al., 2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 420,
"end": 440,
"text": "Galley et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 529,
"end": 542,
"text": "Chiang (2005)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Word alignment models have not stood still in recent years. Unsupervised methods have seen substantial reductions in alignment error (Liang et al., 2006) as measured by the now much-maligned AER metric. A host of discriminative methods have been introduced (Taskar et al., 2005; Moore, 2005; Ayan and Dorr, 2006) . However, few of these methods have explicitly addressed the tension between word alignments and the syntactic processes that employ them (Cherry and Lin, 2006; Daum\u00e9 III and Marcu, 2005; Lopez and Resnik, 2005) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 133,
"end": 153,
"text": "(Liang et al., 2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 257,
"end": 278,
"text": "(Taskar et al., 2005;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 279,
"end": 291,
"text": "Moore, 2005;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
},
{
"start": 292,
"end": 312,
"text": "Ayan and Dorr, 2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 452,
"end": 474,
"text": "(Cherry and Lin, 2006;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
},
{
"start": 475,
"end": 501,
"text": "Daum\u00e9 III and Marcu, 2005;",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 502,
"end": 525,
"text": "Lopez and Resnik, 2005)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "We are particularly motivated by systems like the one described in Galley et al. (2006) , which constructs translations using tree-to-string transducer rules. These rules are extracted from a bitext annotated with both English (target side) parses and word alignments. Rules are extracted from target side constituents that can be projected onto contiguous spans of the source sentence via the word alignment. Constituents that project onto non-contiguous spans of the source sentence do not yield transducer rules themselves, and can only be incorporated into larger transducer rules. Thus, if the word alignment of a sentence pair does not respect the constituent structure of the target sentence, then the minimal translation units must span large tree fragments, which do not generalize well.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 67,
"end": 87,
"text": "Galley et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "We present and evaluate an unsupervised word alignment model similar in character and computation to the HMM model (Ney and Vogel, 1996) , but which incorporates a novel, syntax-aware distortion component which conditions on target language parse trees. These trees, while automatically generated and therefore imperfect, are nonetheless (1) a useful source of structural bias and (2) the same trees which constrain future stages of processing anyway. In our model, the trees do not rule out any alignments, but rather softly influence the probability of transitioning between alignment positions. In particular, transition probabilities condition upon paths through the target parse tree, allowing the model to prefer distortions which respect the tree structure.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 115,
"end": 136,
"text": "(Ney and Vogel, 1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "Our model generates word alignments that better respect the parse trees upon which they are conditioned, without sacrificing alignment quality. Using the joint training technique of Liang et al. (2006) to initialize the model parameters, we achieve an AER superior to the GIZA++ implementation of IBM model 4 (Och and Ney, 2003) and a reduction of 56.3% in aligned interior nodes, a measure of agreement between alignments and parses. As a result, our alignments yield more rules, which better match those we would extract had we used manual alignments.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 182,
"end": 201,
"text": "Liang et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 318,
"end": 328,
"text": "Ney, 2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In a tree transducer system, as in phrase-based systems, the coverage and generality of the transducer inventory is strongly related to the effectiveness of the translation model (Galley et al., 2006) . We will demonstrate that this coverage, in turn, is related to the degree to which initial word alignments respect syntactic correspondences. Galley et al. (2004) proposes a method for extracting tree transducer rules from a parallel corpus. Given a source language sentence s, a target language parse tree t of its translation, and a word-level alignment, their algorithm identifies the constituents in t which map onto contiguous substrings of s via the alignment. The root nodes of such constituents -denoted frontier nodes -serve as the roots and leaves of tree fragments that form minimal transducer rules.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 179,
"end": 200,
"text": "(Galley et al., 2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
},
{
"start": 345,
"end": 365,
"text": "Galley et al. (2004)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF6"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Translation with Tree Transducers",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "Frontier nodes are distinguished by their compatibility with the word alignment. For a constituent c of t, we consider the set of source words s c that are aligned to c. If none of the source words in the linear closure s * c (the words between the leftmost and rightmost members of s c ) aligns to a target word outside of c, then the root of c is a frontier node. The remaining interior nodes do not generate rules, but can play a secondary role in a translation system. 1 The roots of null-aligned constituents are not frontier nodes, but can attach productively to multiple minimal rules. Two transducer rules, t 1 \u2192 s 1 and t 2 \u2192 s 2 , can be combined to form larger translation units by composing t 1 and t 2 at a shared frontier node and appropriately concatenating s 1 and s 2 . However, no technique has yet been shown to robustly extract smaller component rules from a large transducer rule. Thus, for the purpose of maximizing the coverage of the extracted translation model, we prefer to extract many small, minimal rules and generate larger rules via composition. Maximizing the number of frontier nodes supports this goal, while inducing many aligned interior nodes hinders it.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 473,
"end": 474,
"text": "1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Rule Extraction",
"sec_num": "2.1"
},
{
"text": "We now turn to the interaction between word alignments and the transducer extraction algorithm. Consider the example sentence in figure 1A , which demonstrates how a particular type of alignment error prevents the extraction of many useful transducer rules. The mistaken link [la \u21d2 the] intervenes between ax\u00e9s and carri\u00e8r, which both align within an English adjective phrase, while la aligns to a distant subspan of the English parse tree. In this way, the alignment violates the constituent structure of the English parse.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 129,
"end": 138,
"text": "figure 1A",
"ref_id": "FIGREF1"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Word Alignment Interactions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "While alignment errors are undesirable in general, this error is particularly problematic for a syntax-based translation system. In a phrase-based system, this link would block extraction of the phrases [ax\u00e9s sur la carri\u00e8r \u21d2 career oriented] and [les emplois \u21d2 the jobs] because the error overlaps with both. However, the intervening phrase [emplois sont \u21d2 jobs are] would still be extracted, at least capturing the transfer of subject-verb agreement. By contrast, the tree transducer extraction method fails to extract any of these fragments: the alignment error causes all non-terminal nodes in the parse tree to be interior nodes, excluding preterminals and the root. Figure 1B exposes the consequences: a wide array of desired rules are lost during extraction.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 672,
"end": 681,
"text": "Figure 1B",
"ref_id": "FIGREF1"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Word Alignment Interactions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "The degree to which a word alignment respects the constituent structure of a parse tree can be quantified by the frequency of interior nodes, which indicate alignment patterns that cross constituent boundaries. To achieve maximum coverage of the translation model, we hope to infer tree-violating alignments only when syntactic structures truly diverge. .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Word Alignment Interactions",
"sec_num": "2.2"
},
{
"text": "Correct proposed word alignment consistent with human annotation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Legend",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Proposed word alignment error inconsistent with human annotation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Legend",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Word alignment constellation that renders the root of the relevant constituent to be an interior node.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Legend",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Word alignment constellation that would allow a phrase extraction in a phrase-based translation system, but which does not correspond to an English constituent.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Legend",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Frontier node (agrees with alignment)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Italic",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Interior node (inconsistent with alignment)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Italic",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(S (NP (DT[0] NNS[1]) (VP AUX[2] (ADJV NN[3] VBN[4]) .[5]) \u2192 [0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] (S (NP (DT[0] (NNS jobs)) (VP AUX[1] (ADJV NN[2] VBN[3]) .[4]) \u2192 [0] sont [1] [2] [3] [4] (S (NP (DT[0] (NNS jobs)) (VP (AUX are) (ADJV NN[1] VBN[2]) .[3]) \u2192 [0] emplois sont [1] [2] [3] (S NP[0] VP[1] .[2]) \u2192 [0] [1] [2] (S (NP (DT[0] NNS[1]) VP[2] .[3]) \u2192 [0] [1] [2] [3] (S (NP (DT[0] (NNS jobs)) VP[2] .[3]) \u2192 [0] emplois [2] [3] (S (NP (DT[0] (NNS jobs)) (VP AUX[1] ADJV[2]) .[3]) \u2192 [0] emplois [1] [2] [3] (S (NP (DT[0] (NNS jobs)) (VP (AUX are) ADJV[1]) .[2]) \u2192 [0] emplois sont [1] [2]",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Italic",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Figure 1: In this transducer extraction example, (A) shows a proposed alignment from our test set with an alignment error that violates the constituent structure of the English sentence. The resulting frontier nodes are printed in bold; all nodes would be frontier nodes under a correct alignment. (B) shows a small sample of the rules extracted under the proposed alignment, (ii), and the correct alignment, (i) and (ii). The single alignment error prevents the extraction of all rules in (i) and many more. This alignment pattern was observed in our test set and corrected by our model.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Italic",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To allow for this preference, we present a novel conditional alignment model of a foreign (source) sentence f = {f 1 , ..., f J } given an English (target) sentence e = {e 1 , ..., e I } and a target tree structure t. Like the classic IBM models (Brown et al., 1994) , our model will introduce a latent alignment vector a = {a 1 , ..., a J } that specifies the position of an aligned target word for each source word. Formally, our model describes p(a, f|e, t), but otherwise borrows heavily from the HMM alignment model of Ney and Vogel (1996) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 246,
"end": 266,
"text": "(Brown et al., 1994)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 524,
"end": 544,
"text": "Ney and Vogel (1996)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Unsupervised Word Alignment",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The HMM model captures the intuition that the alignment vector a will in general progress across the sentence e in a pattern which is mostly local, perhaps with a few large jumps. That is, alignments are locally monotonic more often than not. Formally, the HMM model factors as:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Unsupervised Word Alignment",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "p(a, f|e) = J j=1 p d (a j |a j \u2212 , j)p (f j |e a j )",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Unsupervised Word Alignment",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "where j \u2212 is the position of the last non-null-aligned source word before position j, p is a lexical transfer model, and p d is a local distortion model. As in all such models, the lexical component p is a collection of unsmoothed multinomial distributions over foreign words.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Unsupervised Word Alignment",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The distortion model p d (a j |a j \u2212 , j)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Unsupervised Word Alignment",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "is a distribution over the signed distance a j \u2212 a j \u2212 , typically parameterized as a multinomial, Gaussian or exponential distribution. The implementation that serves as our baseline uses a multinomial distribution with separate parameters for j = 1, j = J and shared parameters for all 1 < j < J. Null alignments have fixed probability at any position. Inference over a requires only the standard forward-backward algorithm.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Unsupervised Word Alignment",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "The broad and robust success of the HMM alignment model underscores the utility of its assumptions: that word-level translations can be usefully modeled via first-degree Markov transitions and independent lexical productions. However, its distortion model considers only string distance, disregarding the constituent structure of the English sentence.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "To allow syntax-sensitive distortion, we consider a new distortion model of the form",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "p d (a j |a j \u2212 , j, t).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "We condition on t via a generative process that transitions between two English positions by traversing the unique shortest path \u03c1 (a j \u2212 ,a j ,t) through t from a j \u2212 to a j . We constrain ourselves to this shortest path using a staged generative process.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Stage 1 (POP(n), STOP(n)): Starting in the leaf node at a j \u2212 , we choose whether to STOP or POP from child to parent, conditioning on the type of the parent noden. Upon choosing STOP, we transition to stage 2.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Stage 2 (MOVE(n, d)): Again, conditioning on the type of the parentn of the current node n, we choose a siblingn based on the signed distance d = \u03c6n(n) \u2212 \u03c6n(n), where \u03c6n(n) is the index of n in the child list ofn. Zero distance moves are disallowed. After exactly one MOVE, we transition to stage 3.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Stage 3 (PUSH(n, \u03c6 n (n))): Given the current node n, we select one of its childrenn, conditioning on the type of n and the position of the child \u03c6 n (n). We continue to PUSH until reaching a leaf.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "This process is a first-degree Markov walk through the tree, conditioning on the current node and its immediate surroundings at each step. We enforce the property that \u03c1 (a j \u2212 ,a j ,t) be unique by staging the process and disallowing zero distance moves in stage 2. Figure 2 gives an example sequence of tree transitions for a small parse tree. The parameterization of this distortion model follows directly from its generative process. Given a path \u03c1 (a j \u2212 ,a j ,t) with r = k + m + 3 nodes including the two leaves, the nearest common ancestor, k intervening nodes on the ascent and m on the descent, we express it as a triple of staged tree transitions that include k POPs, a STOP, a MOVE, and m PUSHes:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 267,
"end": 275,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "\uf8eb \uf8ed {POP(n 2 ), ..., POP(n k+1 ), STOP(n k+2 )} {MOVE (n k+2 , \u03c6(n k+3 ) \u2212 \u03c6(n k+1 ))} {PUSH (n k+3 , \u03c6(n k+4 )) , ..., PUSH (n r\u22121 , \u03c6(n r ))} \uf8f6 \uf8f8",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Next, we assign probabilities to each tree transition in each stage. In selecting these distributions, we aim to maintain the original HMM's sensitivity to target word order:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 Selecting POP or STOP is a simple Bernoulli distribution conditioned upon a node type.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "\u2022 We model both MOVE and PUSH as multinomial distributions over the signed distance in positions (assuming a starting position of 0 for PUSH), echoing the parameterization popular in implementations of the HMM model.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "This model reduces to the classic HMM distortion model given minimal English trees of only uniformly labeled pre-terminals and a root node. The classic 0-distance distortion would correspond to the 20 For instance, the short path from relieve to on gives a high transition likelihood.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "STOP probability of the pre-terminal label; all other distances would correspond to MOVE probabilities conditioned on the root label, and the probability of transitioning to the terminal state would correspond to the POP probability of the root label. As in a multinomial-distortion implementation of the classic HMM model, we must sometimes artificially normalize these distributions in the deficient case that certain jumps extend beyond the ends of the local rules. For this reason, MOVE and PUSH are actually parameterized by three values: a node type, a signed distance, and a range of options that dictates a normalization adjustment.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Once each tree transition generates a score, their product gives the probability of the entire path, and thereby the cost of the transition between string positions. Figure 3 shows an example learned distribution that reflects the structure of the given parse.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 166,
"end": 174,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "With these derivation steps in place, we must address a handful of special cases to complete the generative model. We require that the Markov walk from leaf to leaf of the English tree must start and end at the root, using the following assumptions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "1. Given no previous alignment, we forego stages 1 and 2 and begin with a series of PUSHes from the root of the tree to the desired leaf.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "2. Given no subsequent alignments, we skip stages 2 and 3 after a series of POPs including a pop conditioned on the root node.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "3. If the first choice in stage 1 is to STOP at the current leaf, then stage 2 and 3 are unnecessary. Hence, a choice to STOP immediately is a choice to emit another foreign word from the current English word.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "4. We flatten unary transitions from the tree when computing distortion probabilities.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "5. Null alignments are treated just as in the HMM model, incurring a fixed cost from any position.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "This model can be simplified by removing all conditioning on node types. However, we found this variant to slightly underperform the full model described above. Intuitively, types carry information about cross-linguistic ordering preferences.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Syntax-Sensitive Distortion",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Because our model largely mirrors the generative process and structure of the original HMM model, we apply a nearly identical training procedure to fit the parameters to the training data via the Expectation-Maximization algorithm. Och and Ney (2003) gives a detailed exposition of the technique.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 232,
"end": 250,
"text": "Och and Ney (2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training Approach",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "In the E-step, we employ the forward-backward algorithm and current parameters to find expected counts for each potential pair of links in each training pair. In this familiar dynamic programming approach, we must compute the distortion probabilities for each pair of English positions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training Approach",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "The minimal path between two leaves in a tree can be computed efficiently by first finding the path from the root to each leaf, then comparing those paths to find the nearest common ancestor and a path through it -requiring time linear in the height of the tree. Computing distortion costs independently for each pair of words in the sentence imposed a computational overhead of roughly 50% over the original HMM model. The bulk of this increase arises from the fact that distortion probabilities in this model must be computed for each unique tree, in contrast to the original HMM which has the same distortion probabilities for all sentences of a given length.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training Approach",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "In the M-step, we re-estimate the parameters of the model using the expected counts collected during the E-step. All of the component distributions of our lexical and distortion models are multinomials. Thus, upon assuming these expectations as values for the hidden alignment vectors, we maximize likelihood of the training data simply by computing relative frequencies for each component multinomial. For the distortion model, an expected count c(a j , a j \u2212 ) is allocated to all tree transitions along the path \u03c1 (a j \u2212 ,a j ,t) . These allocations are summed and normalized for each tree transition type to complete re-estimation. The method of re-estimating the lexical model remains unchanged.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training Approach",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Initialization of the lexical model affects performance dramatically. Using the simple but effective joint training technique of Liang et al. (2006) , we initialized the model with lexical parameters from a jointly trained implementation of IBM Model 1. Liang et al. (2006) shows that thresholding the posterior probabilities of alignments improves AER relative to computing Viterbi alignments. That is, we choose a threshold \u03c4 (typically \u03c4 = 0.5), and take a = {(i, j) : p(a j = i|f, e) > \u03c4 }.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 129,
"end": 148,
"text": "Liang et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 254,
"end": 273,
"text": "Liang et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Training Approach",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Posterior thresholding provides computationally convenient ways to combine multiple alignments, and bidirectional combination often corrects for errors in individual directional alignment models. Liang et al. (2006) suggests a soft intersection of a model m with a reverse model r (foreign to English) that thresholds the product of their posteriors at each position:",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 196,
"end": 215,
"text": "Liang et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Improved Posterior Inference",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "a = {(i, j) : p m (a j = i|f, e) \u2022 p r (a i = j|f, e) > \u03c4 } .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Improved Posterior Inference",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "These intersected alignments can be quite sparse, boosting precision at the expense of recall. We explore a generalized version to this approach by varying the function c that combines p m and p r :",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Improved Posterior Inference",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "a = {(i, j) : c(p m , p r ) > \u03c4 }.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Improved Posterior Inference",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "If c is the max function, we recover the (hard) union of the forward and reverse posterior alignments. If c is the min function, we recover the (hard) intersection. A novel, high performing alternative is the soft union, which we evaluate in the next section:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Improved Posterior Inference",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "c(p m , p r ) = p m (a j = i|f, e) + p r (a i = j|f, e) 2 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Improved Posterior Inference",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "Syntax-alignment compatibility can be further promoted with a simple posterior decoding heuristic we call competitive thresholding. Given a threshold and a matrix c of combined weights for each possible link in an alignment, we include a link (i, j) only if its weight c ij is above-threshold and it is connected to the maximum weighted link in both row i and column j. That is, only the maximum in each column and row and a contiguous enclosing span of above-threshold links are included in the alignment.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Improved Posterior Inference",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "This proposed model is not the first variant of the HMM model that incorporates syntax-based distortion. Lopez and Resnik (2005) considers a simpler tree distance distortion model. Daum\u00e9 III and Marcu (2005) employs a syntax-aware distortion model for aligning summaries to documents, but condition upon the roots of the constituents that are jumped over during a transition, instead of those that are visited during a walk through the tree. In the case of syntactic machine translation, we want to condition on crossing constituent boundaries, even if no constituents are skipped in the process.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 105,
"end": 128,
"text": "Lopez and Resnik (2005)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
},
{
"start": 181,
"end": 207,
"text": "Daum\u00e9 III and Marcu (2005)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Related Work",
"sec_num": "3.4"
},
{
"text": "To understand the behavior of this model, we computed the standard alignment error rate (AER) performance metric. 2 We also investigated extractionspecific metrics: the frequency of interior nodes -a measure of how often the alignments violate the constituent structure of English parses -and a variant of the CPER metric of Ayan and Dorr (2006) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 114,
"end": 115,
"text": "2",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 325,
"end": 345,
"text": "Ayan and Dorr (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Results",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "We evaluated the performance of our model on both French-English and Chinese-English manually aligned data sets. For Chinese, we trained on the FBIS corpus and the LDC bilingual dictionary, then tested on 491 hand-aligned sentences from the 2002 2The hand-aligned test data has been annotated with both sure alignments S and possible alignments P , with S \u2286 P , according to the specifications described in Och and Ney (2003) . With these alignments, we compute AER for a proposed alignment A as: NIST MT evaluation set. For French, we used the Hansards data from the NAACL 2003 Shared Task. 3 We trained on 100k sentences for each language.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 407,
"end": 425,
"text": "Och and Ney (2003)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 592,
"end": 593,
"text": "3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Results",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "\" 1 \u2212 |A\u2229S|+|A\u2229P | |A|+|S| \" \u00d7 100%.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experimental Results",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "We compared our model to the original HMM model, identical in implementation to our syntactic HMM model save the distortion component. Both models were initialized using the same jointly trained Model 1 parameters (5 iterations), then trained independently for 5 iterations. Both models were then combined with an independently trained HMM model in the opposite direction: f \u2192 e. 4 Table 1 summarizes the results; the two models perform similarly. The main benefit of our model is the effect on rule extraction, discussed below. We also compared our French results to the public baseline GIZA++ using the script published for the NAACL 2006 Machine Translation Workshop Shared Task. 5 Similarly, we compared our Chinese results to the GIZA++ results in Ayan and Dorr (2006) . Our models substantially outperform GIZA++, confirming results in Liang et al. (2006) . Table 2 shows the effect on AER of competitive thresholding and different combination functions.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 753,
"end": 773,
"text": "Ayan and Dorr (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 842,
"end": 861,
"text": "Liang et al. (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 864,
"end": 871,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": "TABREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Alignment Error Rate",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "3 Following previous work, we developed our system on the 37 provided validation sentences and the first 100 sentences of the corpus test set. We used the remainder as a test set.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Alignment Error Rate",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "4 Null emission probabilities were fixed to 1 |e| , inversely proportional to the length of the English sentence. The decoding threshold was held fixed at \u03c4 = 0.5.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Alignment Error Rate",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "5 Training includes 16 iterations of various IBM models and a fixed null emission probability of .01. The output of running GIZA++ in both directions was combined via intersection. The most dramatic effect of competitive thresholding is to improve alignment quality for hard unions. It also impacts rule extraction substantially.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Alignment Error Rate",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "While its competitive AER certainly speaks to the potential utility of our syntactic distortion model, we proposed the model for a different purpose: to minimize the particularly troubling alignment errors that cross constituent boundaries and violate the structure of English parse trees. We found that while the HMM and Syntactic models have very similar AER, they make substantially different errors.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Rule Extraction Results",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "To investigate the differences, we measured the degree to which each set of alignments violated the supplied parse trees, by counting the frequency of interior nodes that are not null aligned. Figure 4 summarizes the results of the experiment for French: the Syntactic distortion with competitive thresholding reduces tree violations substantially. Interior node frequency is reduced by 56% overall, with the most dramatic improvement observed for clausal constituents. We observed a similar 50% reduction for the Chinese data.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 193,
"end": 201,
"text": "Figure 4",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Rule Extraction Results",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "Additionally, we evaluated our model with the transducer analog to the consistent phrase error rate (CPER) metric of Ayan and Dorr (2006) . This evaluation computes precision, recall, and F1 of the rules extracted under a proposed alignment, relative to the rules extracted under the gold-standard sure alignments. Figure 4 : The syntactic distortion model with competitive thresholding decreases the frequency of interior nodes for each type and the whole corpus. the syntactic HMM model and competitive thresholding together. Individually, each of these changes contributes substantially to this increase. Together, their benefits are partially, but not fully, additive.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 117,
"end": 137,
"text": "Ayan and Dorr (2006)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 315,
"end": 323,
"text": "Figure 4",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Rule Extraction Results",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "In light of the need to reconcile word alignments with phrase structure trees for syntactic MT, we have proposed an HMM-like model whose distortion is sensitive to such trees. Our model substantially reduces the number of interior nodes in the aligned corpus and improves rule extraction while nearly retaining the speed and alignment accuracy of the HMM model. While it remains to be seen whether these improvements impact final translation accuracy, it is reasonable to hope that, all else equal, alignments which better respect syntactic correspondences will be superior for syntactic MT.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Interior nodes can be used, for instance, in evaluating syntax-based language models. They also serve to differentiate transducer rules that have the same frontier nodes but different internal structure.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Going beyond aer: An extensive analysis of word alignments and their impact on mt",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Bonnie",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Necip Fazil Ayan",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Dorr",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "ACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Necip Fazil Ayan and Bonnie J. Dorr. 2006. Going beyond aer: An extensive analysis of word alignments and their impact on mt. In ACL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "The mathematics of statistical machine translation: Parameter estimation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "F",
"middle": [],
"last": "Peter",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Stephen",
"middle": [
"A Della"
],
"last": "Brown",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Vincent",
"middle": [
"J"
],
"last": "Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Della Pietra",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mercer",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1994,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "19",
"issue": "",
"pages": "263--311",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Peter F. Brown, Stephen A. Della Pietra, Vincent J. Della Pietra, and Robert L. Mercer. 1994. The mathematics of statistical machine translation: Parameter estimation. Computational Linguistics, 19:263-311.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Soft syntactic constraints for word alignment through discriminative training",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Colin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Cherry",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dekang",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "ACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Colin Cherry and Dekang Lin. 2006. Soft syntactic constraints for word alignment through discriminative training. In ACL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "A hierarchical phrase-based model for statistical machine translation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chiang",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "ACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "David Chiang. 2005. A hierarchical phrase-based model for statistical machine translation. In ACL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "Induction of word and phrase alignments for automatic document summarization",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Hal",
"middle": [],
"last": "Daum\u00e9",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Iii",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Daniel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Marcu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "31",
"issue": "4",
"pages": "505--530",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hal Daum\u00e9 III and Daniel Marcu. 2005. Induction of word and phrase alignments for automatic document summarization. Computational Linguistics, 31(4):505-530, December. French Prec. Recall F1",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Relative to the classic HMM baseline, our syntactic distortion model with competitive thresholding improves the tradeoff between precision and recall of extracted transducer rules",
"authors": [],
"year": null,
"venue": "Table",
"volume": "3",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Table 3: Relative to the classic HMM baseline, our syntactic distortion model with competitive thresh- olding improves the tradeoff between precision and recall of extracted transducer rules. Both French aligners were decoded using the best-performing soft union combiner. For Chinese, we show aligners under both soft and hard union combiners. * Denotes relative change from the second line to the third line.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "What's in a translation rule",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Michel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Galley",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Mark",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hopkins",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kevin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Knight",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Daniel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Marcu",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "HLT-NAACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Michel Galley, Mark Hopkins, Kevin Knight, and Daniel Marcu. 2004. What's in a translation rule? In HLT-NAACL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Scalable inference and training of context-rich syntactic translation models",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Michel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Galley",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Jonathan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Graehl",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Kevin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Knight",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Daniel",
"middle": [],
"last": "Marcu",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Steve",
"middle": [],
"last": "Deneefe",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Wei",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ignacio",
"middle": [],
"last": "Thayer",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "ACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Michel Galley, Jonathan Graehl, Kevin Knight, Daniel Marcu, Steve DeNeefe, Wei Wang, and Ignacio Thayer. 2006. Scal- able inference and training of context-rich syntactic transla- tion models. In ACL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Alignment by agreement",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Percy",
"middle": [],
"last": "Liang",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ben",
"middle": [],
"last": "Taskar",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Klein",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2006,
"venue": "HLT-NAACL",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Percy Liang, Ben Taskar, and Dan Klein. 2006. Alignment by agreement. In HLT-NAACL.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Improved hmm alignment models for languages with scarce resources",
"authors": [
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lopez",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Resnik",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "ACL WPT-05",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "A. Lopez and P. Resnik. 2005. Improved hmm alignment mod- els for languages with scarce resources. In ACL WPT-05.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Algorithms for syntax-aware statistical machine translation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "I",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Melamed",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Conference on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Machine Translation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "I. Dan Melamed. 2004. Algorithms for syntax-aware statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the Conference on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Machine Transla- tion.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "A discriminative framework for bilingual word alignment",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Moore",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "EMNLP",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Robert C. Moore. 2005. A discriminative framework for bilin- gual word alignment. In EMNLP.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Hmm-based word alignment in statistical translation",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Hermann",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ney",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Stephan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vogel",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1996,
"venue": "COLING",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Hermann Ney and Stephan Vogel. 1996. Hmm-based word alignment in statistical translation. In COLING.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "A systematic comparison of various statistical alignment models",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Josef",
"middle": [],
"last": "Franz",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Hermann",
"middle": [],
"last": "Och",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ney",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "29",
"issue": "",
"pages": "19--51",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Franz Josef Och and Hermann Ney. 2003. A systematic com- parison of various statistical alignment models. Computa- tional Linguistics, 29:19-51.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "A discriminative matching approach to word alignment",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ben",
"middle": [],
"last": "Taskar",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Simon",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lacoste-Julien",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Dan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Klein",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "EMNLP",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Ben Taskar, Simon Lacoste-Julien, and Dan Klein. 2005. A discriminative matching approach to word alignment. In EMNLP.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"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": "",
"pages": "377--404",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Dekai Wu. 1997. Stochastic inversion transduction grammars and bilingual parsing of parallel corpora. Computational Linguistics, 23:377-404.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF1": {
"text": "{ Pop(VBN), Pop(ADJP), Pop(VP), Stop(S) } Stage 2: { Move(S, -1) } Stage 3: { Push(NP, 1), Push(DT, 1",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure"
},
"FIGREF2": {
"text": "An example sequence of staged tree transitions implied by the unique shortest path from the word oriented (a j \u2212 = 5) to the word the (a j = 1).",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure"
},
"FIGREF3": {
"text": "For this example sentence, the learned dis-tortion distribution of p d (a j |a j \u2212 , j, t) resembles its counterpart p d (a j |a j \u2212 , j) of the HMM model but reflects the constituent structure of the English tree t.",
"uris": null,
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure"
},
"TABREF2": {
"text": "",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td>: Alignment error rates (AER) by decoding</td></tr><tr><td>method for the syntactic HMM model. The compet-</td></tr><tr><td>itive thresholding heuristic (CT) is particularly help-</td></tr><tr><td>ful for the hard union combination method.</td></tr></table>",
"html": null
},
"TABREF3": {
"text": "shows improvements in F1 by using",
"num": null,
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td/><td/><td>Reduction 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 (percent) Interior Node Frequency</td><td>NP</td><td colspan=\"2\">VP HMM Model PP</td><td>S</td><td colspan=\"2\">SBAR Syntactic Model + CT Terminals All Non-</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>(percent)</td><td>54.1</td><td>46.3</td><td>52.4</td><td>77.5</td><td>58.0</td><td>53.1</td><td>56.3</td></tr><tr><td/><td/><td>Corpus Frequency</td><td>14.6</td><td>10.3</td><td>6.3</td><td>4.8</td><td>1.9</td><td>41.1</td><td>100.0</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>45.3</td><td colspan=\"2\">54.8</td><td/><td>59.7</td><td/><td>43.7</td><td>45.1</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>6.3</td><td>4.8</td><td/><td/><td>1.9</td><td/><td>41.1</td><td>100</td></tr></table>",
"html": null
}
}
}
} |