Multi-level evaluation for machine translation

10th Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, WMT 2015 at the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2015 - Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 361-365

  Chen, Boxing ^a   Guo, Hongyu ^a   Kuhn, Roland ^a  

^a NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; MACHINE TRANSLATION; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

'CURRENT; BENCHMARKING METRICS; EVALUATION CRITERIA; HUMAN JUDGMENTS; MACHINE TRANSLATIONS; MULTILEVELS; PERFORMANCE; STATISTICAL SYSTEMS;

BENCHMARKING;

EID: 85019798689     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. Anonymous. 2015. Representation based translation evaluation metrics. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Beijing, China, July.
2. Satanjeev Banerjee and Alon Lavie. 2005. METEOR: An automatic metric for MT evaluation with improved correlation with human judgments. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Intrinsic and Extrinsic Evaluation Measures for Machine Translation and/or Summarization, pages 65-72, Ann Arbor, Michigan, June. Association for Computational Linguistics.
3. Michael Denkowski and Alon Lavie. 2014. Meteor universal: Language specific translation evaluation for any target language. In Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, pages 376-380, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, June. Association for Computational Linguistics.
4. George Doddington. 2002. Authomatic evaluation of machine translation quality using n-gram cooccurrence statistics. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference, page 128132, San Diego, CA.
5. Ding Liu and Daniel Gildea. 2005. Syntactic features for evaluation of machine translation. In ACL 2005 Workshop on Intrinsic and Extrinsic Evaluation Measures for Machine Translation and/or Summarization, pages 25-32, Ann Arbor, MI.
6. Chang Liu, Daniel Dahlmeier, and Hwee Tou Ng. 2011. Better evaluation metrics lead to better machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 375-384, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK., July. Association for Computational Linguistics.
7. Chi-kiu Lo and Dekai Wu. 2011. Meant: An inexpensive, high-accuracy, semi-automatic metric for evaluating translation utility based on semantic roles. In Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pages 220-229, Portland, Oregon, USA, June. Association for Computational Linguistics.
8. Matous Machacek and Ondrej Bojar. 2014. Results of the wmt14 metrics shared task. In Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, pages 293-301, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, June. Association for Computational Linguistics.
9. Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, ToddWard, andWei-Jing Zhu. 2002. BLEU: A method for automatic evaluation of Machine Translation. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 311-318, Philadelphia, July. ACL.
10. Matthew Snover, Bonnie Dorr, Richard Schwartz, Linnea Micciulla, and John Makhoul. 2006. A study of translation edit rate with targeted human annotation. In Proceedings of Association for Machine Translation in the Americas.
11. Matthew G. Snover, Nitin Madnani, Bonnie Dorr, and Richard Schwartz. 2009. Ter-plus: Paraphrase, semantic, and alignment enhancements to translation edit rate. In Machine Translation, volume 23, pages 117-127.
12. Joseph Turian, Lev Ratinov, and Yoshua Bengio. 2010. Word representations: A simple and general method for semi-supervised learning. In ACL, pages 384-394.
13. Xiaofeng Wu, Hui Yu, and Qun Liu. 2013. DCU participation in WMT2013 metrics task. In Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, pages 435-439, Sofia, Bulgaria, August. Association for Computational Linguistics.