Hi, We once empirically compared two different recombination schemes in a hierarchical phrase-based system (without any kind of neural network language model):
Recombination T. The T recombination scheme recombines derivations that produce identical translations. (I.e., hypotheses with the same translation but different phrase segmentation are recombined.) Recombination LM. The LM recombination scheme recombines derivations with identical language model context. (This is what we'd usually do.) Cf. the following publication: M. Huck, D. Vilar, M. Freitag, and H. Ney. A Performance Study of Cube Pruning for Large-Scale Hierarchical Machine Translation. In Proceedings of the NAACL 7th Workshop on Syntax, Semantics and Structure in Statistical Translation (SSST-7), pages 29-38, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, June 2013. http://aclweb.org/anthology//W/W13/W13-0804.pdf You'll find a couple of statistics and performance plots in the paper for Chinese-to-English and Arabic-to-English translation tasks. This was all done with the Jane SMT toolkit. http://www.hltpr.rwth-aachen.de/jane/ Note that the cube pruning k-best generation limit was applied after recombination for the experiments in the paper. I tend to think that you could do the "Recombination T" scheme if the benefit of an RNNLM in terms of translation quality justifies it. There might be pitfalls, e.g. regarding pruning settings and tuning on n-best lists. Default Moses settings won't necessarily be a good choice. Cheers, Matthias On Mon, 2016-03-07 at 15:41 -0600, Lane Schwartz wrote: > Philipp, > > Are you aware of any published work examining the importance of hypothesis > recombination in terms of time/space/quality tradeoffs? > > Lane > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Philipp Koehn <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > integrating this into the decoder will break all hypothesis recombination, > > so it may be better (and definitely easier) to use the RNNLM to rerank > > n-best lists. > > > > -phi > > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Jake Ballinger <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hello everyone, > >> > >> Has anyone used an RNNLM language model instead of one of the recommended > >> language models? I was specifically looking at the RNNLM toolkit provided > >> by Tomas Mikolov at http://rnnlm.org/. > >> > >> Thank you! > >> > >> -- > >> Jake Ballinger > >> Major: Computer Science > >> Minors: Chinese, French, Spanish, & Math > >> 443-974-6184 > >> [email protected] > >> Box 582 > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
