Advertisement

A Spelling Mistake Correction (SMC) Model for Resolving Real-Word Error

  • Swadha GuptaEmail author
  • Sumit Sharma
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 410)

Abstract

Spelling correction has been haunting humans in various fields of society like while creating business proposals, contract tenders, students doing their assignments, in email communications, sending request for proposals, while writing content for website and so on. Already existing Dictionary based correction approaches have helped by providing solution to the problem when the written word doesn’t even qualify to be called as a legal word. But is it the only challenge a writer faces while writing the desired documents! The words, which fall in the category of correct spelling words, may sometimes be the word which writer did not intend to write. The above illustrated genre of errors is called Real-Word error. This paper proposes a spelling correction system whose main focus is on automatic identification and correction of real word errors accurately and efficiently. The approach includes hybridization of Trigram and Bayesian approach and using Modified Brown corpus as a training set. A large set of commonly confused words is used in this case for evaluating the performance of the proposed approach.

Keywords

Real-word errors Spelling mistakes Spelling corrector Modified corpus Supervised approach Unsupervised approach 

References

  1. 1.
    Huang, Y., Murphey, Y.L., Ge, Y.: Automotive diagnosis typo correction using domain knowledge and machine learning. In: IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence, pp. 267–274 (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kukich, K.: Technique for automatically correcting words in text. ACM Comput. Surveys (CSUR) 24, 377–439 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Peterson, J.L.: A note on undetected typing errors. Commun. ACM 29.7, 633–637 (1986)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mays, E., Damerau, F.J., Mercer, R.L.: Context based spelling correction. Inf. Process. Manage. 27(5), 517–522 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yarowsky, D.: Unsupervised word sense disambiguation rivaling supervised methods. In: Proceedings of the 33rd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 189–196 (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Golding, A.R., Yves, S.: Combining trigram-based and feature-based methods for context-sensitive spelling correction. In: Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 71–78 (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Golding, A.R.: A Bayesian hybrid method for context-sensitive spelling correction. arXiv preprint cmp-lg/9606001, pp. 1–15 (1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mangu, L., Eric, B.: Automatic rule acquisition for spelling correction. ICML 97, 187–194 (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Golding, A.R., Roth, D.: A winnow-based approach to context-sensitive spelling correction. Mach. Learn. 34(1–3), 107–130 (1999)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fossati, D., Eugenio, B.D.: I saw TREE trees in the park: how to correct real-word spelling mistakes. LREC, pp. 896–901 (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhou, Y., et al.: A correcting model based on tribayes for real-word errors in english essays. In: 2012 Fifth International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Design (ISCID), vol. 1, pp. 407–410. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wilcox-O’Hearn, A., Graeme, H., Alexander, B.: Real-word spelling correction with trigrams: a reconsideration of the Mays, Damerau, and Mercer model. In: Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing, pp. 605–616. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nelson, F.W., Kucera, H.: Brown Corpus Manual. Brown University (1979)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceChandigarh UniversityMohaliIndia

Personalised recommendations