1 / 9

“It works, but how far can it go?”

“It works, but how far can it go?”. Dallin Hardcastle. IBM CANDIDE. Statistical Machine Translation. Project from 1987-1994. IBM’s theory was that over 50% of western languages are completely predictable. Through the use of algorithms (IBM claimed 80% accurate algorithms).

duscha
Download Presentation

“It works, but how far can it go?”

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “It works, but how far can it go?” DallinHardcastle

  2. IBM CANDIDE • Statistical Machine Translation. • Project from 1987-1994. • IBM’s theory was that over 50% of western languages are completely predictable. • Through the use of algorithms (IBM claimed 80% accurate algorithms). • Accuracy in translation was generally 60%

  3. IBM CANDIDE • It only used very large bilingual corpora. • Did not take into account any grammars, lexicons, phonological rules, etc. • The U.S. government DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) rated SYSTRAN higher than IBM’s new system, and used it frequently in the 1990’s. • DARPA even helped fund CANDIDE.

  4. SYSTRAN • Founded in 1968 by Dr. Peter Toma. • Survived the major decrease of funding from ALPAC. • Has offices in Paris and La Jolla. • During the Cold War, helped the US Air Force extensively. • Provides technology for Babel Fish, also translation widget on Mac OS X.

  5. SYSTRAN • Rule Based Machine Translation. • In a book by YorickWilcks, an AI professor in England, he claims that RBMT (like Systran) has outperformed SMT (like Candide) up to this point.

  6. So, SMT or RbMT? • SMT seems to flow more “fluently”. • Generally, only 60% accuracy (on the high side). • Algorithms are not tailored to any specific languages. Benefit? Downfall? • Sometimes awkward constructions. • Once rules are established, much higher accuracy rates. • Translation between two languages with well-formed rules is easier. (Costly)

  7. Google Translate/Babel Fish • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GdSC1Z1Kzs • Babel Fish is now gone (for now), replaced by Bing Translator, also SMT. • Babel Fish was run by SYSTRAN

  8. HYBRID • Dr. Wilcks proposes that for MT technology to truly advance, there must be highly sophisticated HYBRID systems. • This means a mix of SMT and RbMT. • Trados uses TM, whether local or from a server, but as far as very rapid, accurate, totally automated MT, we are not there yet.

  9. Some hybrid companies? • IBM • Working with LinguaSys • SYSTRAN • In 2010, new Hybrid software

More Related