one thing to remember is that the link between AER and BLEU is not obvious; in my view at least AER-like scores should be treated with skepticism and the real merit of an alignment approach should be the corresponding translation performance (BLEU etc).
can you provide associated BLEU scores for those AER numbers? Miles 2009/3/4 J.Tiedemann <[email protected]>: > > hi, > > I'm just wondering if Och's "refined" heuristics is also implemented > in Moses. The "grow-diag" is not exactly the same as far as I > understand. > > The reason why I'm asking is because I found out that in all of my > experiments with europarl data the "intersection" always produces the > best results in terms of AER (for example using the wpt03 data) > whereas I see better performances reported for refined compared with > intersection in various papers (also for the wpt03 data). However, I > cannot believe that the grow-heuristics would perform so much worse > than the original "refined" approach. > > My AER scores with standard GIZA settings and moses heuristics for > wpt03 data are the following: > > moses.intersect AER = 0.0613 > moses.grow-diag AER = 0.0843 > moses.grow-diag-final-and AER = 0.0926 > moses.grow-diag-final AER = 0.1312 > moses.srctotgt AER = 0.1039 > moses.tgttosrc AER = 0.1162 > moses.union AER = 0.1444 > > does this sound reasonable? > > > Jorg > _______________________________________________ > Moses-support mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support > -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. _______________________________________________ Moses-support mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
