- From: Yves Savourel <ysavourel@enlaso.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 12:35:12 +0200
- To: "'Dave Lewis'" <dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie>, <public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org>
Hi Dave, In the case of QuEst, for the scenario I have in mind, one would for example perform the MT part with MS Hub, then pass that information to QuEst and get back a score that indicate a level of confidence for that translation candidate. So that's a step after Mt and before any human looks at it. I may be wrong, but "MT Confidence" seems to be a good place to put that information. Even if QuEst is a wrong example. Having MT Confidence restricted to *self-reported* value seems very limiting. But maybe I'm mis interpreting the initial aim of the data category. Cheers, -ys -----Original Message----- From: Dave Lewis [mailto:dave.lewis@cs.tcd.ie] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 12:25 PM To: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org Subject: Re: MT Confidence definition Hi Yves, I don't necessarily agree with this based on the example you give in relation to quality estimation in Quest. Is not the goal of quality estimation to predict the quality of a translation of a given source string for a given MT engine training corpora and training regime _prior_ to actually performing the translation? In which case it would be an annotation of a translation but of a _source_ with reference to an existing or planned MT engine (which you rightly say in response to Sergey can be resolved via the annotatorsRef). So while the basic data structure of mtConfidence would work for, the use case, name and wording don't i think match the use of MT QE. Declan, Ankit could you comment - I'm not really an expert here, and not up to speed on the different applications of MT QE. cheers, Dave On 17/07/2013 08:29, Yves Savourel wrote: > Hi all, > > I've noticed a minor text issue in the specification: > > For the MT Confidence data category we say: > > "The MT Confidence data category is used to communicate the > self-reported confidence score from a machine translation engine of the accuracy of a translation it has provided." > > This is very limiting. > > I think it should say: > > "The MT Confidence data category is used to communicate the confidence > score of the accuracy of a translation provided by a machine translation." > > (and later: "the self-reported confidence score" should be "the reported confidence score"). > > There could be cases where the confidence score is provided by another > system than the one that provided the MT candidate. The QuEst project > is an example of this > http://staffwww.dcs.shef.ac.uk/people/L.Specia/projects/quest.html) > > Cheers, > -ys > > >
Received on Wednesday, 17 July 2013 10:35:44 UTC