Hi Christian, Thanks. You are right. But I think there is no need for such a penalty, since all candidates for a given source sentence contain the same number of OOVs and so the penalty does not help at all. Do you know the reason?
Cheers, Kaveh On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Christian Hardmeier <[email protected]> wrote: > I think you're on the right track. For some reason, moses doesn't report > the OOV penalty feature, which adds a hardcoded penalty of -100 to the total > score for each input word that was copied to the output because no suitable > translation was found in the phrase table. Your test sentence probably > contains two unknown words that account for the -200 difference between the > score you calculated and the one output by the decoder. Does that make > sense? > > Best, > Christian > > Kaveh Taghipour <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Hi, > > > >I have generated an N-best list with moses, but I do not know how to > compute > >the final score. I tried a log-linear model but came up with a wrong > number. > >For example: > > > >moses.ini: > >---------------------------------------- > ># distortion (reordering) weight > >[weight-d] > >0.120662 > > > ># language model weights > >[weight-l] > >0.251853 > > > ># translation model weights > >[weight-t] > >0.0675335 > >0.103843 > >0.0720954 > >0.00630806 > >0.101934 > > > ># word penalty > >[weight-w] > >-0.275771 > > > >Assuming a log-linear model, the score for the following sentence should > be > >*-54.076* but the decoder prints: > > > >0 ||| .... ||| d: 0 lm: -219.367 w: -6 tm: -3.17999 -4.43847 -2.63049 > >-3.87513 3.99959 ||| *-254.076* > > > >Thank you in advance for helping. > > > >Cheers, > >Kaveh > > > >_______________________________________________ > >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
