Machine Translation

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 121–133 | Cite as

Capturing practical natural language transformations

Article

Abstract

We study automata for capturing the transformations in practical natural language processing (NLP) systems, especially those that translate between human languages. For several variations of finite-state string and tree transducers, we survey answers to formal questions about their expressiveness, modularity, teachability, and generalization. We conclude that no formal device yet captures everything that is desirable, and we point to future research.

Keywords

Translation Automata 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arnold A, Dauchet M (1982) Morphismes et Bimorphismes d’Arbres. Theor Comput Sci 20: 33–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baum LE, Eagon JA (1967) An inequality with application to statistical estimation for probabilistic functions of Markov processes and to a model for ecology. Bull Am Math Soc 73:360–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown P, Della Pietra S, Della Pietra V, Mercer R (1993) The mathematics of statistical machine translation: parameter estimation. Comput Linguist 19(2): 263–311Google Scholar
  4. Doner J (1970) Tree acceptors and some of their applications. J Comput Syst Sci 4: 406–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eisner J (2003) Learning non-isomorphic tree mappings for machine translation. In: 41st annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Sapporo, Japan, pp 205–208Google Scholar
  6. Galley M, Hopkins M, Knight K, Marcu D (2004) What’s in a translation rule? In: Proceedings of the human language technology conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: HLT-NAACL 2004. Boston, MA, pp 273–280Google Scholar
  7. Gécseg F, Steinby M (1984) Tree Automata. Akadémiai Kiadó, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  8. Graehl J (1997) Carmel finite-state toolkit. http://www.isi.edu/licensed-sw/carmel
  9. Graehl J, Knight K (2004) Training tree transducers. In: Proceedings of the human language technology conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: HLT-NAACL 2004. Boston, MA, pp 105–112Google Scholar
  10. Knight K, Al-Onaizan Y (1998) Translation with finite-state devices. In: Machine translation and the information soup: third conference of the association for machine translation in the Americas, AMTA’98. Springer, Berlin, pp 421–437Google Scholar
  11. Knight K, Graehl J (1998) Machine transliteration. Comput Linguist 24(4): 599–612Google Scholar
  12. Knight K, Graehl J (2005) An overview of probabilistic tree transducers for natural language processing. In: Computational linguistics and intelligent text processing, 6th international conference, CICLing 2005, proceedings. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 3406. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  13. Kumar S, Byrne W (2003). A weighted finite state transducer implementation of the alignment template model for statistical machine translation. In: HLT-NAACL: human language technology conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics. Edmonton, AL, Canada, pp 63–70Google Scholar
  14. Maletti A (2007) Compositions of extended top-down tree transducers. In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on language and automata theory and applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 379–390Google Scholar
  15. Maletti A, Graehl J, Hopkins M, Knight K (2008) The power of extended top-down tree transducers. SIAM J Comput (to appear)Google Scholar
  16. May J, Knight K (2006) Tiburon: a weighted tree automata toolkit. In: Proceedings of the international conference on implementation and application of automata (CIAA). Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4094. Springer, Berlin, pp 102–113Google Scholar
  17. Mohri M, Pereira F, Riley M (2000) The design principles of a weighted finite-state transducer library. Theor Comput Sci 231(1): 17–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rounds WC (1970) Mappings and grammars on trees. Math Syst Theory 4(3): 257–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schutzenberger MP (1961) A remark on finite transducers. Inf Control 4: 185–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shen L, Xu J, Weischedel R (2008) A new string-to-dependency machine translation algorithm with a target dependency language model. In: 46th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies, proceedings of the conference. Columbus, OH, pp 577–585Google Scholar
  21. Shieber S (2004) Synchronous grammars as tree transducers. In: 7th international workshop of TAG and related formalisms (TAG+7). Vancouver, BC, Canada, pp 88–95Google Scholar
  22. Shieber SM, Schabes Y (1990) Synchronous tree-adjoining grammars. In: COLING-90. Papers presented to the 13th international conference on computational linguistics, vol 3. Helsinki, Finland, pp 253–258Google Scholar
  23. Thatcher JW (1970) Generalized sequential machine maps. J Comput System Sci 4: 339–367Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information Sciences InstituteUniversity of Southern CaliforniaMarina del ReyUSA

Personalised recommendations