Re: [Apertium-stuff] Ideas from GramTrans (was: Domain and style/genre)
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
Re: [Apertium-stuff] Ideas from GramTrans (was: Domain and style/genre)
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012, at 13:10, Francis Tyers wrote: El dc 19 de 12 de 2012 a les 13:02 +0100, en/na Per Tunedal va escriure: Hi, I'm a bit confused. See below. Yours, Per Tunedal On Wed, Dec 19, 2012, at 11:22, Francis Tyers wrote: El dc 19 de 12 de 2012 a les 10:09 +0100, en/na Tino Didriksen va escriure: On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 12:12 AM, k...@keldix.com wrote: GramTrans http://visl.sdu.dk/~eckhard/pdf/MTsummit07_final.pdf --snip-- 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... I explained how you could do this in a previous email. You would need to write a module to go between the lexical-transfer output and the structural transfer input. In that stage the lexical selection is already done, isn't it? In what stage ? In the lexical transfer stage ? no. In the structural transfer stage yes. This is because, like I say above write a module to _go between_ this means in the middle of. See my schematic below. I supposed meaning (relations) was supposed to facilitate lexical selection. If you can make it facilitate lexical selection good luck!!! What's the use of it later in the translations chain? --- - -- | lexical transf. | == | lexical selection | == | structural transf. | |_| |___| || The lexical selection is done in the aptly-named lexical selection stage, which sits between lexical transfer (which outputs all the possible translations of each word) and structural transfer (which performs structural changes, and only works on pairs of single source language/target language words). Fran Hmm I don't get it. I'm comparing with the wiki page Apertium for dummies in an adjacent window: Tagger - Lexical Selection - Lexical transfer (look up disambiguated source-language baseword ...) - Structural transfer. Is transfer done before lexical selection in stead? If so, is the lexical selection done in the target language rather than in the source language? Thus, the meaning in the source language cannot be used at all? In that case, what's the use of meaning? -- 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 -- 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
Re: [Apertium-stuff] Ideas from GramTrans (was: Domain and style/genre)
El dc 19 de 12 de 2012 a les 13:39 +0100, en/na Per Tunedal va escriure: On Wed, Dec 19, 2012, at 13:10, Francis Tyers wrote: El dc 19 de 12 de 2012 a les 13:02 +0100, en/na Per Tunedal va escriure: Hi, I'm a bit confused. See below. Yours, Per Tunedal On Wed, Dec 19, 2012, at 11:22, Francis Tyers wrote: El dc 19 de 12 de 2012 a les 10:09 +0100, en/na Tino Didriksen va escriure: On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 12:12 AM, k...@keldix.com wrote: GramTrans http://visl.sdu.dk/~eckhard/pdf/MTsummit07_final.pdf --snip-- 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... I explained how you could do this in a previous email. You would need to write a module to go between the lexical-transfer output and the structural transfer input. In that stage the lexical selection is already done, isn't it? In what stage ? In the lexical transfer stage ? no. In the structural transfer stage yes. This is because, like I say above write a module to _go between_ this means in the middle of. See my schematic below. I supposed meaning (relations) was supposed to facilitate lexical selection. If you can make it facilitate lexical selection good luck!!! What's the use of it later in the translations chain? --- - -- | lexical transf. | == | lexical selection | == | structural transf. | |_| |___| || The lexical selection is done in the aptly-named lexical selection stage, which sits between lexical transfer (which outputs all the possible translations of each word) and structural transfer (which performs structural changes, and only works on pairs of single source language/target language words). Fran Hmm I don't get it. I'm comparing with the wiki page Apertium for dummies in an adjacent window: That page is out of date. Tagger - Lexical Selection - Lexical transfer (look up disambiguated source-language baseword ...) - Structural transfer. Is transfer done before lexical selection in stead? No. If so, is the lexical selection done in the target language rather than in the source language? Thus, the meaning in the source language cannot be used at all? In that case, what's the use of meaning? No, it is done in the source language. Good question, perhaps you can ask Keld ;) Fran -- 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
