Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T23:37:21.732Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Improving syntactic rule extraction through deleting spurious links with translation span alignment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 September 2013

JINGBO ZHU ,
QIANG LI  and
TONG XIAO
JINGBO ZHU
Affiliation:
Natural Language Processing Laboratory, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China e-mail: zhujingbo@mail.neu.edu.cn, liqiangneu@gmail.com, xiaotong@mail.neu.edu.cn
QIANG LI
Affiliation:
Natural Language Processing Laboratory, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China e-mail: zhujingbo@mail.neu.edu.cn, liqiangneu@gmail.com, xiaotong@mail.neu.edu.cn
TONG XIAO
Affiliation:
Natural Language Processing Laboratory, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China e-mail: zhujingbo@mail.neu.edu.cn, liqiangneu@gmail.com, xiaotong@mail.neu.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Most statistical machine translation systems typically rely on word alignments to extract translation rules. This approach would suffer from a practical problem that even one spurious word alignment link can prevent some desirable translation rules from being extracted. To address this issue, this paper presents two approaches, referred to as sub-tree alignment and phrase-based forced decoding methods, to automatically learn translation span alignments from parallel data. Then, we improve the translation rule extraction by deleting spurious links and inserting new links based on bilingual translation span correspondences. Some comparison experiments are designed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approaches.

Type
Articles
Information
Natural Language Engineering , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , March 2015 , pp. 227 - 249
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brown, P. F., Della Pietra, S. A., Della Pietra, V. J., and Mercer, R. L., 1993. The mathematics of statistical machine translation: parameter estimation. Computational Linguistics 19 (2): 263–311.Google Scholar
Cherry, C., and Lin, D., 2006. Soft syntactic constraints for word alignment through discriminative training. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computa- tional Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING/ACL), Sydney, Australia, pp. 105–112.Google Scholar
Chiang, D. 2007. Hierarchical phrase-based translation. Computational Linguistics 33 (2), 201–28.Google Scholar
DeNero, J., and Klein, D., 2007. Tailoring word alignments to syntactic machine translation. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Prague, Czech Republic, pp. 17–24.Google Scholar
Deng, Y., and Zhou, B., 2009. Optimizing word alignment combination for phrase table training. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Annual Meeting of the ACL and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing of the AFNLP (ACL–IJCNLP), short paper, Suntec, Singapore, pp. 229–232.Google Scholar
Fossum, V., Knight, K., and Abney, S., 2008. Using syntax to improve word alignment precision for syntax-based machine translation. In Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Columbus, Ohio, USA, pp. 44–52.Google Scholar
Fraser, A., and Marcu, D., 2007. Measuring word alignment quality for statistical machine translation. Computational Linguistics 33 (3): 293–303.Google Scholar
Galley, M., Hopkins, M., Knight, K., and Marcu, D. 2004. What's in a translation rule? In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT-NAACL), Boston, Massachusetts, USA, pp. 273–80.Google Scholar
Galley, M., and Manning, C. D., 2008. A simple and effective hierarchical phrase reordering model. In Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, pp. 848–56.Google Scholar
Genzel, D., 2010. Automatically learning source-side reordering rules for large scale machine translation. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), Beijing, China, pp. 376–84.Google Scholar
Groves, D., Hearne, M., and Way, A., 2004. Robust sub-sentential alignment of phrase-structure trees. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 1072–8.Google Scholar
Hermjakob, U. 2009. Improved word alignment with statistics and linguistic heuristics. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), Singapore, pp. 229–37.Google Scholar
Huang, L., and Chiang, D., 2007. Forest rescoring: faster decoding with integrated language models. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Prague, Czech Republic, pp. 144–51.Google Scholar
Huang, L., Knight, K., and Joshi, A., 2006. Statistical syntax-directed translation with extended domain of locality. In Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation of the Americas (AMTA), Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, pp. 66–73.Google Scholar
Imamura, K., 2001. Hierarchical phrase alignment harmonized with parsing. In Proceedings of the Sixth Natural Language Processing Pacific Rim Symposium (NLPRS), Tokyo, Japan, pp. 377–84.Google Scholar
Ittycheriah, A., and Roukos, S. 2005. A maximum entropy word aligner for Arabic–English machine translation. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT/EMNLP), Vancouver, pp. 89–96.Google Scholar
Khalilov, M., and Sima'an, K., 2011. Statistical translation after source reordering: oracles, context-aware models, and empirical analysis. Natural Language Engineering 18 (4): 491–519.Google Scholar
Koehn, P., 2004. Statistical significance tests for machine translation evaluation. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), Boston, Massachusetts, USA, pp. 388–95.Google Scholar
Koehn, P., Hoang, H., Birch, A., Callison-Burch, C., Federico, M., Bertoldi, N., Cowan, B., Shen, W., Moran, C., Zens, R., Dyer, C., Bojar, O., Constantin, A., and Herbst, E., 2007. Moses: open source toolkit for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Prague, Czech Republic, pp. 177–80.Google Scholar
Koehn, P., Och, F. J., and Marcu, D. 2003. Statistical phrase-based translation. In Proceedings of the 2003 Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT-NAACL), Edmonton, pp. 48–54.Google Scholar
Liu, Y., Liu, Q., and Lin, S., 2005. Log-linear models for word alignment. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, pp. 459–66.Google Scholar
Liu, Y., Liu, Q., and Lin, S., 2010. Discriminative word alignment by linear modeling. Computational Linguistics 36 (3): 303–39.Google Scholar
Marcu, D., Wang, W., Echihabi, A., and Knight, K., 2006. SPMT: statistical machine translation with syntactified target language phrases. In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), Sydney, Australia, pp. 44–52.Google Scholar
May, J., and Knight, K. 2007. Syntactic re-alignment models for machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP–CoNLL), Prague, pp. 360–68.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C., Yih, W.-t., and Bode, A., 2006. Improved discriminative bilingual word alignment. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING/ACL), Sydney, Australia, pp. 513–20.Google Scholar
Och, F. J., 2003. Minimum error rate training in statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Sapporo, Japan, pp. 160–67.Google Scholar
Och, F. J., and Ney, H. 2000. Improved statistical alignment models. In Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Hongkong, pp. 440–47.Google Scholar
Och, F., and Ney, H., 2002. Discriminative training and maximum entropy models for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, p. 295–302.Google Scholar
Pauls, A., Klein, D., Chiang, D., and Knight, K., 2010. Unsupervised syntactic alignment with inversion transduction grammars. In Proceedings of Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT–NAACL), Los Angeles, California, USA, pp. 118–26.Google Scholar
Petrov, S., Barrett, L., Thibaux, R., and Klein, D., 2006. Learning accurate, compact, and interpretable tree annotation. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING/ACL), Sydney, Australia, pp. 433–40.Google Scholar
Sun, J., Zhang, M., and Tan, C. L., 2010a. Exploring syntactic structural features for sub-tree alignment using bilingual tree kernels. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Uppsala, Sweden, pp. 306–15.Google Scholar
Sun, J., Zhang, M., and Tan, C. L., 2010b. Discriminative induction of sub-tree alignment using limited labeled data. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), Beijing, China, pp. 1047–55.Google Scholar
Taskar, B., Lacoste-Julien, S., and Klein, D. 2005. A discriminative matching approach to word alignment. In Proceedings of Human Language Technology Conference and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (HLT/EMNLP), Vancouver, pp. 73–80.Google Scholar
Tillman, C., 2004. A unigram orientation model for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (HLT-NAACL), Boston, Massachusetts, USA, pp. 101–4.Google Scholar
Tinsley, J., Zhechev, V., Hearne, M., and Way, A., 2007. Robust language pair-independent sub-tree alignment. In Proceedings of MT Summit XI, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 467–74.Google Scholar
Vogel, S., Ney, H., and Tillmann, C., 1996. HMM-based word alignment in statistical translation. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 836–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, W., Knight, K., and Marcu, D. 2007. Binarizing syntax trees to improve syntax-based machine translation accuracy. In Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP–CoNLL), Prague, pp. 746–54.Google Scholar
Xiao, T., Zhu, J., Zhang, H., and Li, Q., 2012. NiuTrans: an open source toolkit for phrase-based and syntax-based machine translation. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Jeju, Republic of Korea, pp. 19–24.Google Scholar
Xiong, D., Liu, Q., and Lin, S., 2006. Maximum entropy based phrase reordering model for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING/ACL), Sydney, Australia, pp. 521–8.Google Scholar