Machine Translation

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 1–72 | Cite as

The Logos Model: An Historical Perspective

  • Bernard (Bud) Scott
Article

Abstract

The conceptual model underlying the Logos System is described, along with original design motivations and objectives. The model is characterized with respect to four fundamental issues, each of which (it is believed) has been addressed in novel ways: (a) how natural language is to be represented; (b) how linguistic knowledge is to be stored, (c) how this knowledge store is to be applied to the input stream, (d) how complexity effects are to be dealt with as the knowledge store grows, year after year, in the quest for fully automatic,high-quality translation (FAHQT). Empirically rather than formally motivated, the Model nevertheless reflects principles derived from assumptions about human sentence processing, which are described. Using the metaphor of a biological neural net, or bionet, with which the Logos Model has parallels, a complex, 57-word sentence is tracked as it proceeds along a pipeline architecture, simulating a hypothesized human model. Limitations of the model are discussed.

semantico-syntactic representation associative semantics mental model pipeline architecture human sentence processing FAHQT 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ALPAC: 1966, Language and Machines: Computers in Translation and Linguistics, A report by the Automatic Language Processing Advisory Committee, Division of Behavioral Sciences, National Research Council, Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. [Available at: www.nap.edu/openbook/ARC000005/html/]Google Scholar
  2. Barlow, H. B.: 1972, ‘Single Units and Sensation: A Neuron Doctrine for Perceptual Psychology?’, Perception 1, 371-394.Google Scholar
  3. Beaven, J. L.: 1992, ‘Shake and Bake Machine Translation’, in Proceedings of the fifteenth (sic) International Congress on Computational Linguistics, COLING-92, Nantes, France, pp. 603-609.Google Scholar
  4. Chomsky, Noam: 1957, Syntactic Structures, Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
  5. Chomsky, Noam: 1965, Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  6. Chomsky, Noam: 1990, ‘On Formalization and Formal Linguistics’, Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 8, 143-147.Google Scholar
  7. Crick, F. H. C. and C. Asanuma: 1986, ‘Certain Aspects of the Anatomy and Physiology of the Cerebral Cortex’, in McClelland and Rumelhart (1986), Vol. 2, pp. 333-371.Google Scholar
  8. Harris, Zellig: 1968, Mathematical Structures of Language, John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Hinton, G. E., James McClelland, and David Rumelhart: 1986, ‘Distributed Representations’, in Rumelhart and McClelland (1986), Vol. 1, pp. 77-109.Google Scholar
  10. Hopfield, J. J.: 1984, ‘Neurons with Graded Response have Collective Computational Properties like Those of Two-State Neurons’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 87, 3088-3092; reprinted in James A. Anderson and Edward Rosenfeld (eds), Neurocomputing: Foundations of Research, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1989), pp. 579-584.Google Scholar
  11. Hutchins, W. J.: 1986. Machine Translation: Past, Present, Future, Ellis Horwood, Chichester.Google Scholar
  12. Jackendoff, Ray: 2002, Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  13. Juola, Patrick: 1989, ‘Machine Translation and Lojban’, ju'i lobypli 8, www.lojban.org/files/whylojban/ mactrans.txt. Consulted 22.10.2002Google Scholar
  14. Karttunen, Lauri: 1987, Radical Lexicalism, Technical Report, Center for Study of Language and Information, Stanford.Google Scholar
  15. Kohonen, T.: 1982, ‘Self-Organized Formation of Topologically Correct Feature Maps’, Biological Cybernetics 43, 59-69; reprinted in J. Anderson, and E. Rosenfeld (eds), Neurocomputing: Foundations of Research, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1989), pp. 511-521.Google Scholar
  16. McClelland, James, David Rumelhart and G. E. Hinton: 1986, ‘The Appeal of Parallel Distributed Processing’, in Rumelhart and McClelland (1986), Vol. 1, pp. 46-76.Google Scholar
  17. Rumelhart, David and James McClelland (eds): 1986, Parallel Distributed Processing, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  18. Scott, Bernard E.: 1989, ‘The Logos System’, in MT Summit II: Final Programme, Exhibition, Papers, Munich, pp. 137-142.Google Scholar
  19. Scott, Bernard E.: 1990, ‘Biological Neural Net for Parsing Long, Complex Sentences’, Logos Corporation Technical Report.Google Scholar
  20. Sherrington, Charles: 1941, Man on his Nature, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  21. Somers, H. L.: 1992/3, ‘Current Research in Machine Translation’, Machine Translation 7, 231-246.Google Scholar
  22. Thorpe, Simon: 1995, ‘Localized Versus Distributed Representations’, in M. A. Arbib (ed.), TheHandbook of Brain Theory and Neural Networks, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 549-552.Google Scholar
  23. Yngve, V. H.: 1964, ‘Implications of Mechanical Translation Research’, in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 108, 275-296; reprinted in H. E. Bruderer (ed.), Automatische Sprachübersetzung: Wege der Forschung, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt (1982), pp. 33-49.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernard (Bud) Scott
    • 1
  1. 1.Parse International Inc.Tarpon SpringsUSA E-mail

Personalised recommendations