Hi Mahmoud

To post to the mailing list, please subscribe to it first. You can
subscribe here
   http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
Also, if you need to post large datafiles, you should place the files
somewhere for people to download it, and give people the URL. Don't post
very large datafiles. I use google drive

I've looked at your problem. I ran it without LMs and without all the
command line arguments.
   $MOSES_DIR/bin/moses -config Sent15-FilteredModel/moses.ini -input-file
sent151.txt
   $MOSES_DIR/bin/moses -config
Sent15-FilteredModel/BinaryTables/moses.bin.ini -input-file sent151.txt

They gave me exactly the same answer and model scores. So I'm not sure what
the problem is.

Remember - both lexical reordering models are used whenever a hypothesis is
created, by either translation model.



On 11 February 2014 19:15, <[email protected]> wrote:

> As list administrator, your authorization is requested for the
> following mailing list posting:
>
>     List:    [email protected]
>     From:    [email protected]
>     Subject: I think moses has a bug when dealing with binarized factored
> models
>     Reason:  Post by non-member to a members-only list
>
> At your convenience, visit:
>
>     http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/admindb/moses-support
>
> to approve or deny the request.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mahmoud Ghoneim <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 14:15:17 -0500
> Subject: I think moses has a bug when dealing with binarized factored
> models
> Hi moses-support team,
> I have an Ar-En factored translation model (Ar: lexeme|lemma|POS to En:
> lexeme|lemma|POS) with two translation paths (0-0 and 1,2-0). When I use
> the text version of the model and the binarized version of the same exact
> model, I get two totally different outputs!!
>
> I chose an input sentence and I generated the detailed verbose (v=3)
> logging and compared the results for the two cases and it seems that the
> decoder is not calculating the hypothesis's scores in a correct way when it
> deals with binarized version of a factored model !! The problem is
> generated due to considering all factors (rather than only the specific
> decoding-path factors) when calculating the lexical-reordering scores
> (explained in details below)
>
> Would you please review the attached files and confirm on my conclusions
> or give me the proper explanation of this behavior?
>
> I am attaching a 'tgz' file
>


> containing the following:
> 1- the input sentence (sent151.txt)
> 2- the filtered text model (in subDirectory 'Sent15-FilteredModel')
> 3- the binarized version of the filtered text model (in subDirectory
> 'Sent15-FilteredModel/BinaryTables')
> 4- the output translation using the text model (sent151.txt.out-mosesR1)
> 5- the output translation using the binarized model
> (sent151.txt.out-mosesR1-filtered-bin)
> 6- the verbose logging files for both cases. ()
> 7- the commands used to run moses. (command.note)
>
> Examples of the problem:
> - If you review the creation of hypothesis 6 from 0 (at line 2747 in text
> model verbose and at line 2743 in the binarized model verbose), you find
> moses considers the three factors while calculating the reordering scores,
> (while it is supposed to consider factor0 only as this hypothesis is form
> the first decoding-path 0-0)
> - Also, if you review the creation of hypothesis 61 from 0 for the text
> model which corresponds to hypothesis 64 for the binarized model, you will
> find again that the lexical-reordering scores for decoding-path 0-0 is
> included while this hypothesis is generated from the decoding-path 1,2-0!!
>
> Thanks in advance for your help,
> Mahmoud Ghoneim, PhD
> Post Doctoral Research Scientist
> Computer Science Department
> School of Engineering and Applied Science
> The George Washington University
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: [email protected]
> To:
> Cc:
> Date:
> Subject: confirm c4f798e58a24737bbfd9f76a5540c9d2c4b39cdd
> If you reply to this message, keeping the Subject: header intact,
> Mailman will discard the held message.  Do this if the message is
> spam.  If you reply to this message and include an Approved: header
> with the list password in it, the message will be approved for posting
> to the list.  The Approved: header can also appear in the first line
> of the body of the reply.
>



-- 
Hieu Hoang
Research Associate
University of Edinburgh
http://www.hoang.co.uk/hieu
_______________________________________________
Moses-support mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support

Reply via email to