I've started using an OOV feature (fires for each LM-OOV) together
with an open-vocabulary LM, and found that this improves the BLEU
score. Typically, the weight learned on the OOV feature (by MERT) is
quite a bit more negative than the default amount estimated during LM
training, but it is still far greater than the "avoid at all costs"
moses/joshua OOV default behavior. As a result, there is a small
increase in the number of OOVs in the output (I have not counted this
number). However, the I find that the bleu score increases a bit for
doing this (magnitude depends on a number of factors), and the "extra"
OOVs typically occur in places where the possible English translation
would have been completely nonsensical.
-Chris

On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Alexander Fraser
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> Is there some way to penalize LM-OOVs when using Moses+KenLM? I saw a
> suggestion to create an open-vocab LM (I usually use closed-vocab) but
> I think this means that in some context a LM-OOV could be produced in
> preference to a non LM-OOV. This should not be the case in standard
> phrase-based SMT (e.g., using the feature functions used in the Moses
> baseline for the shared task for instance). Instead, Moses should
> produce the minimal number of LM-OOVs possible.
>
> There are exceptions to this when using different feature functions.
> For instance, we have a paper on trading off transliteration vs
> semantic translation (for Hindi to Urdu translation), where the
> transliterations are sometimes LM-OOV, but still a better choice than
> available semantic translations (which are not LM-OOV). But the
> overall SMT models we used supports this specific trade-off (and it
> took work to make the models do this correctly, this is described in
> the paper).
>
> I believe for the other three LM packages used with Moses the minimal
> number of LM-OOVs is always produced. I've switched back to
> Moses+SRILM for now due to this issue. I think it may be the case that
> Moses+KenLM actually produces the maximal number of OOVs allowed by
> the phrases loaded, which would be highly undesirable. Empirically, it
> certainly produces more than Moses+SRILM in my experiments.
>
> Thanks and Cheers, Alex
> _______________________________________________
> Moses-support mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
>
_______________________________________________
Moses-support mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support

Reply via email to