El 2017-04-01 19:59, Marc Riera Irigoyen escribió: > Thank you very much for your feedback, it has helped me improve my > proposal.
No problem, I ask some more questions below :) > I agree with you that the estimates were low, I have made them higher > and calculated an estimated coverage goal based on them. I have also > added more details about the planned tasks to answer your questions (I > just had not thought enough about the whole process of adding stems > and rules). > > I think that the English tagger is good enough at the present and I > have not considered training it, but I am aware that the Catalan > tagger fails more frequently, so I have included some time in my work > plan to train it (if necessary). Have you done an evaluation of the English tagger? I got the impression that it was much worse. I think it might be hard to improve over the 96% of the Catalan tagger: http://wiki.apertium.org/wiki/Comparison_of_part-of-speech_tagging_systems Do you think an MT system with 91% coverage will be useful for postedition ? What kind of coverage does Google have ? (Try taking a large text and seeing how many words are untranslated) Have you thought about using a guesser for "translating" proper names? What are the principle transfer problems with eng->cat as you see them now ? Perhaps give a criticism of this piece of text ? What are other existing resources you can use ? Are there any dictionaries you can use ? Are you going to be calculating the coverage over the Wikipedia ? If so, 20 million tokens is going to take a long time to translate. I think that it might be better if you focussed just on eng->cat rather than cat->eng. Fran ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
