Towards a better understanding of statistical post-editing

We describe several experiments to better understand the usefulness of statistical post-edition (SPE) to improve phrasebased statistical MT (PBMT) systems raw outputs. Whatever the size of the training corpus, we show that SPE systems trained on general domain data offers no breakthrough to our baseline general domain PBMT system. However, using manually post-edited system outputs to train the SPE led to a slight improvement in the translations quality compared with the use of professional reference translations. We also show that SPE is far more effective for domain adaptation, mainly because it recovers a lot of specific terms unknown to our general PBMT system. Finally, we compare two domain adaptation techniques, post-editing a general domain PBMT system vs building a new domain-adapted PBMT system with two different techniques, and show that the latter outperforms the first one. Yet, when the PBMT is a “black box”, SPE trained with post-edited system outputs remains an interesting option for domain adaptation.

[1]  Michel Simard,et al.  Statistical Phrase-Based Post-Editing , 2007, NAACL.

[2]  Christian Boitet,et al.  SECTra_w.1: an Online Collaborative System for Evaluating, Post-editing and Presenting MT Translation Corpora , 2008, LREC.

[3]  Andreas Stolcke,et al.  SRILM - an extensible language modeling toolkit , 2002, INTERSPEECH.

[4]  Kevin Knight,et al.  Automated Postediting of Documents , 1994, AAAI.

[5]  Ralph Weischedel,et al.  A STUDY OF TRANSLATION ERROR RATE WITH TARGETED HUMAN ANNOTATION , 2005 .

[6]  Philipp Koehn,et al.  Statistical Post-Editing on SYSTRAN‘s Rule-Based Translation System , 2007, WMT@ACL.

[7]  Gorka Labaka,et al.  Statistical Post-Editing : A Valuable Method in Domain Adaptation of RBMT Systems for Less-Resourced Languages , 2008 .

[8]  Hermann Ney,et al.  A Systematic Comparison of Various Statistical Alignment Models , 2003, CL.

[9]  Philipp Koehn,et al.  Statistical Significance Tests for Machine Translation Evaluation , 2004, EMNLP.

[10]  Salim Roukos,et al.  Bleu: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation , 2002, ACL.

[11]  Roland Kuhn,et al.  Rule-Based Translation with Statistical Phrase-Based Post-Editing , 2007, WMT@ACL.

[12]  Christopher Hogan,et al.  Toward the Development of a Post-Editing Module for Machine Translation Raw Output , 2000 .

[13]  Philipp Koehn,et al.  Moses: Open Source Toolkit for Statistical Machine Translation , 2007, ACL.

[14]  Hervé Blanchon,et al.  The LIG Machine Translation System for WMT 2010 , 2010, WMT@ACL.

[15]  Francisco Casacuberta,et al.  Statistical Post-Editing of a Rule-Based Machine Translation System , 2009, NAACL.

[16]  Hervé Blanchon,et al.  Collection of a Large Database of French-English SMT Output Corrections , 2012, LREC.

[17]  Josef van Genabith,et al.  Statistical Post-Editing for a Statistical MT System , 2011, MTSUMMIT.

[18]  Philipp Koehn,et al.  Statistical Post Editing and Dictionary Extraction: Systran/Edinburgh Submissions for ACL-WMT2009 , 2009, WMT@EACL.

[19]  Ignacio Garcia,et al.  Translating by post-editing: is it the way forward? , 2011, Machine Translation.

[20]  Cyril Goutte,et al.  Domain adaptation of MT systems through automatic post-editing , 2007, MTSUMMIT.

[21]  Franz Josef Och,et al.  Minimum Error Rate Training in Statistical Machine Translation , 2003, ACL.

[22]  Matthew G. Snover,et al.  A Study of Translation Edit Rate with Targeted Human Annotation , 2006, AMTA.

[23]  K. Bretonnel Cohen,et al.  Last Words: Amazon Mechanical Turk: Gold Mine or Coal Mine? , 2011, CL.