Hi,
I would be a bit uncomfortable to call Hiero a string-to-tree model,
since the use of "tree" in these descriptions typically refers to a
syntactic
tree with linguistically motivated labels.
The whole confusion stems from the distinction between formally syntactic
and linguistically syntactic models. David Chiang makes this distinction and
calls Hiero formally syntactic, but not linguistically syntactic.
-phi
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Thomas Schoenemann <
thomas_schoenem...@yahoo.de> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Thank you for the quick answer! I am right, then, that string->tree is
> equivalent to simultaneous parsing and translation?
>
> Best,
> Thomas
>
> ------------------------------
> *Von:* Lane Schwartz <dowob...@gmail.com>
> *An:* Thomas Schoenemann <thomas_schoenem...@yahoo.de>
> *CC:* "moses-support@mit.edu" <moses-support@mit.edu>
> *Gesendet:* 20:17 Freitag, 30.März 2012
> *Betreff:* Re: [Moses-support] Newbie question: what category is Hiero?
>
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Thomas Schoenemann <
> thomas_schoenem...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> there is quite a discussion about hierarchical and syntax-based
> approaches here at the moment. For lack of time I could not follow it
> closely, so I hope this question contributes to the discussion rather than
> being superfluous: in terms of {tree/string} -> {tree/string}, how would
> you classify Hiero? My understanding of tree -> {string/tree} is that you
> have a source tree given, which is not the case for Hiero. And
> string->string does in my understanding not involve CFG-like rules at all.
> So Hiero would be string->tree. But this solution is entirely based on
> eliminating the alternatives. I'd prefer to have an expert come up with a
> constructive explanation.
>
> Thanks much!
> Thomas (currently University of Düsseldorf)
>
> P.S: MERT now has an optional positivity constraint.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moses-support mailing list
> Moses-support@mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
>
>
> Also, if you're reading the literature on different types of
> syntactically-informed translation models, be aware that many of the
> (mostly older) papers use noisy channel terminology.
>
> In those older papers, the authors switch the direction of the model, and
> so for what you might think of as a string->tree system, the authors of
> such papers say they have a tree->string system. In other words, they write
> output->input instead of input->output.
>
> Lane
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moses-support mailing list
> Moses-support@mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
>
>
_______________________________________________
Moses-support mailing list
Moses-support@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
