On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 12:12 AM, <k...@keldix.com> wrote:
> > GramTrans http://visl.sdu.dk/~eckhard/pdf/MTsummit07_final.pdf
>
> I read this paper, and what I understood is that GramTrans employs a
> number of
> MT techniques, including the ones we use in Apertium. But they also use the
> concept relations that I am proposing, and some statistical MT, and more.
>
GramTrans' translation chain goes through the stages of: Tokenization,
morphology, syntax, semantics, dependency, and finally translation. Our
translation engines are basically really strong analysis chains, which the
translation program makes use of but is not part of.
There are some target language information injected into the analysis, but
it's not vital.
The statistical part is almost non-existent - it is entirely optional.
If you want detailed information, ask Eckhard Bick <eckhard.b...@mail.dk>
directly.
> I found that their system looked quite advanced. Could it be considered
> state of the art?
>
We certainly think so!
The "problem" is that it takes a very long time to develop, but such is
life for all rule-based systems.
> If so, would we want to also use some of the techniques they use?
>
You already do!
Apertium makes use of CG in some pairs, which is the cornerstone of our
analysis chains.
> It seems that their system basically is rule-based, on top of some
> grammar analysis. I would think that this would need an architecture
> in Apertium that is quite modularized ("The Unix way").
>
GramTrans is highly modular, each chain is made up of up to 20 separate
parts that just feed forward via pipes.
> Myself not being familiar with the code of Apertium at all, is this so?
> And could a module with use of concept reletions be easily included in the
> stack
> of translation modules?
>
Someone more familiar with Apertium will have to answer that bit...
> How much are we doing of what GramTrans is doing and are there plans to go
> further that way?
>
I have wanted to do a proof of concept of turning Apertium into a similar
analyse -> translate procedure, but haven't had time. There is really no
reason that separate translation pairs all have their own source language
analysis, when a single combined one would considerably reduce analysis
errors.
What we have learned from GramTrans is that source language analysis errors
account for the vast majority of translation errors.
-- Tino Didriksen
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LogMeIn Rescue: Anywhere, Anytime Remote support for IT. Free Trial
Remotely access PCs and mobile devices and provide instant support
Improve your efficiency, and focus on delivering more value-add services
Discover what IT Professionals Know. Rescue delivers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/logmein_12329d2d
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
