Results 1 -
7 of
7
Type-Based MCMC
"... Most existing algorithms for learning latentvariable models—such as EM and existing Gibbs samplers—are token-based, meaning that they update the variables associated with one sentence at a time. The incremental nature of these methods makes them susceptible to local optima/slow mixing. In this paper ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 3 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Most existing algorithms for learning latentvariable models—such as EM and existing Gibbs samplers—are token-based, meaning that they update the variables associated with one sentence at a time. The incremental nature of these methods makes them susceptible to local optima/slow mixing. In this paper, we introduce a type-based sampler, which updates a block of variables, identified by a type, which spans multiple sentences. We show improvements on part-of-speech induction, word segmentation, and learning tree-substitution grammars. 1
SCFG Decoding Without Binarization
"... Conventional wisdom dictates that synchronous context-free grammars (SCFGs) must be converted to Chomsky Normal Form (CNF) to ensure cubic time decoding. For arbitrary SCFGs, this is typically accomplished via the synchronous binarization technique of (Zhang et al., 2006). A drawback to this approac ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 3 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Conventional wisdom dictates that synchronous context-free grammars (SCFGs) must be converted to Chomsky Normal Form (CNF) to ensure cubic time decoding. For arbitrary SCFGs, this is typically accomplished via the synchronous binarization technique of (Zhang et al., 2006). A drawback to this approach is that it inflates the constant factors associated with decoding, and thus the practical running time. (DeNero et al., 2009) tackle this problem by defining a superset of CNF called Lexical Normal Form (LNF), which also supports cubic time decoding under certain implicit assumptions. In this paper, we make these assumptions explicit, and in doing so, show that LNF can be further expanded to a broader class of grammars (called “scope-3”) that also supports cubic-time decoding. By simply pruning non-scope-3 rules from a GHKM-extracted grammar, we obtain better translation performance than synchronous binarization. 1
Cube pruning as heuristic search
- In Proceedings of EMNLP
, 2009
"... Cube pruning is a fast inexact method for generating the items of a beam decoder. In this paper, we show that cube pruning is essentially equivalent to A * search on a specific search space with specific heuristics. We use this insight to develop faster and exact variants of cube pruning. 1 ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 2 (1 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Cube pruning is a fast inexact method for generating the items of a beam decoder. In this paper, we show that cube pruning is essentially equivalent to A * search on a specific search space with specific heuristics. We use this insight to develop faster and exact variants of cube pruning. 1
Weight pushing and binarization for fixed-grammar parsing
"... We apply the idea of weight pushing (Mohri, 1997) to CKY parsing with fixed context-free grammars. Applied after rule binarization, weight pushing takes the weight from the original grammar rule and pushes it down across its binarized pieces, allowing the parser to make better pruning decisions earl ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
We apply the idea of weight pushing (Mohri, 1997) to CKY parsing with fixed context-free grammars. Applied after rule binarization, weight pushing takes the weight from the original grammar rule and pushes it down across its binarized pieces, allowing the parser to make better pruning decisions earlier in the parsing process. This process can be viewed as generalizing weight pushing from transducers to hypergraphs. We examine its effect on parsing efficiency with various binarization schemes applied to tree substitution grammars from previous work. We find that weight pushing produces dramatic improvements in efficiency, especially with small amounts of time and with large grammars. 1
An Alternative to Synchronous Tree Substitution Grammars †
, 2010
"... Synchronous tree substitution grammars (stsg) are a (formal) tree transformation model that is used in the area of syntax-based machine translation. A competitor that is at least as expressive as stsg is proposed and compared to stsg. The competitor is the extended multi bottom-up tree transducer (m ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
Synchronous tree substitution grammars (stsg) are a (formal) tree transformation model that is used in the area of syntax-based machine translation. A competitor that is at least as expressive as stsg is proposed and compared to stsg. The competitor is the extended multi bottom-up tree transducer (mbot), which is the bottom-up analogue with the additional feature that states have non-unary ranks. Unweighted mbot have already been investigated with respect to their basic properties, but the particular properties of the constructions that are required in the machine translation task are largely unknown. stsg and mbot are compared with respect to binarization, regular restriction, and application. Particular attention is paid to the complexity of the constructions. 1
Tree Parsing with Synchronous Tree-Adjoining Grammars
, 2011
"... Restricting the input or the output of a grammar-induced translation to a given set of trees plays an important role in statistical machine translation. The problem for practical systems is to find a compact (and in particular, finite) representation of said restriction. For the class of synchronous ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
Restricting the input or the output of a grammar-induced translation to a given set of trees plays an important role in statistical machine translation. The problem for practical systems is to find a compact (and in particular, finite) representation of said restriction. For the class of synchronous treeadjoining grammars, partial solutions to this problem have been described, some being restricted to the unweighted case, some to the monolingual case. We introduce a formulation of this class of grammars which is effectively closed under input and output restrictions to regular tree languages, i.e., the restricted translations can again be represented by grammars. Moreover, we present an algorithm that constructs these grammars for input and output restriction, which is inspired by Earley’s algorithm.
Using Categorial Grammar to Label Translation Rules
"... Adding syntactic labels to synchronous context-free translation rules can improve performance, but labeling with phrase structure constituents, as in GHKM (Galley et al., 2004), excludes potentially useful translation rules. SAMT (Zollmann and Venugopal, 2006) introduces heuristics to create new non ..."
Abstract
- Add to MetaCart
Adding syntactic labels to synchronous context-free translation rules can improve performance, but labeling with phrase structure constituents, as in GHKM (Galley et al., 2004), excludes potentially useful translation rules. SAMT (Zollmann and Venugopal, 2006) introduces heuristics to create new non-constituent labels, but these heuristics introduce many complex labels and tend to add rarely-applicable rules to the translation grammar. We introduce a labeling scheme based on categorial grammar, which allows syntactic labeling of many rules with a minimal, well-motivated label set. We show that our labeling scheme performs comparably to SAMT on an Urdu–English translation task, yet the label set is an order of magnitude smaller, and translation is twice as fast.

