Hi,
I had a query with regard to use of lattice input in moses.
There is a little difference in the translations generated when I run moses
using the 'normal' input format and when I run it with 'lattice input'
format.
The translations weren't radically different - only a few phrases were
different.
When running moses without lattice input, each line in my input file looks
like the following:-
a b c d e f g h
When running it using word lattices each line in my input file looks like
the following:-
((('*EPS*',1.0,1),),(('a',1.0,1),),(('b',1.0,1),),(('c',1.0,1),),(('d',1.0,1),),(('e',1.0,1),),(('f',1.0,1),),(('g',1.0,1),),(('h',1.0,1),),(('*EPS*',1.0,1),),)
Should there be any differences in the translations produced in the two
cases?
When calling moses I give the parameters -inputtype 2 -weight-i 0.2.
Also I wished to know, how is the 'weight-i' used here?
My understanding is that (weight-i)*log(path weights) + lambda1*lm + ....
determines the final log probability of a hypothesis. (where by path weights
I mean the product of the arc weights we specify in the lattice input format
for the path in question). Is it correct? and in that case should one also
perform some sort of tuning for this weight?
Regards,
Amit
_______________________________________________
Moses-support mailing list
Moses-support@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
