MAXSIM: A maximum similarity metric for machine translation evaluation

ACL-08: HLT - 46th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Proceedings of the Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 55-62

  Chan, Yee Seng ^a   Ng, Hwee Tou ^a  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATIC MACHINES; DEPENDENCY RELATION; EVALUATION METRICS; MACHINE TRANSLATION EVALUATIONS; MT EVALUATIONS; N-GRAMS; PRECISION AND RECALL; SIMILARITY FUNCTIONS; SIMILARITY METRICS; SIMILARITY SCORES;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS;

TRANSLATION (LANGUAGES);

EID: 84859890276     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. S. Banerjee and A. Lavie. 2005. METEOR: An automatic metric for MT evaluation with improved correlation with human judgments. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Intrinsic and Extrinsic Evaluation Measures for MT and/or Summarization, ACL05, pages 65-72.
2. C. Callison-Burch, C. Fordyce, P. Koehn, C. Monz, and J. Schroeder. 2007. (meta-) evaluation of machine translation. In Proceedings of the SecondWorkshop on Statistical Machine Translation, ACL07, pages 136- 158.
3. J. Gimenez and L. Marquez. 2007. Linguistic features for automatic evaluation of heterogenous MT systems. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, ACL07, pages 256-264.
4. H.W. Kuhn. 1955. The hungarian method for the assignment problem. Naval Research Logistic Quarterly, 2(1):83-97.
5. A. Lavie and A. Agarwal. 2007. METEOR: An automatic metric for MT evaluation with high levels of correlation with human judgments. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, ACL07, pages 228-231.
6. R. McDonald, K. Crammer, and F. Pereira. 2005. Online large-margin training of dependency parsers. In Proceedings of ACL05, pages 91-98.
7. I. D. Melamed, R. Green, and J. P. Turian. 2003. Precision and recall of machine translation. In Proceedings of HLT-NAACL03, pages 61-63.
8. G. A. Miller. 1990. WordNet: An on-line lexical database. International Journal of Lexicography, 3(4):235-312.
9. J. Munkres. 1957. Algorithms for the assignment and transportation problems. Journal of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 5(1):32-38.
10. M. Palmer, D. Gildea, and P. Kingsbury. 2005. The proposition bank: An annotated corpus of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics, 31(1):71-106.
11. K. Papineni, S. Roukos, T. Ward, and W. J. Zhu. 2002. BLEU: A method for automatic evaluation of machine translation. In Proceedings of ACL02, pages 311-318.
12. M. Rajman and A. Hartley. 2002. Automatic ranking of MT systems. In Proceedings of LREC02, pages 1247- 1253.
13. A. Ratnaparkhi. 1996. A maximum entropy model for part-of-speech tagging. In Proceedings of EMNLP96, pages 133-142.
14. C. Rijsbergen. 1979. Information Retrieval. Butterworths, London, UK, 2nd edition.
15. B. Taskar, S. Lacoste-Julien, and D. Klein. 2005. A discriminative matching approach to word alignment. In Proceedings of HLT/EMNLP05, pages 73-80.
16. L. Zhou, C. Y. Lin, and E. Hovy. 2006. Re-evaluating machine translation results with paraphrase support. In Proceedings of EMNLP06, pages 77-84.