2016 International Conference on Computation of Power, Energy Information and Commuincation (ICCPEIC) 2016
DOI: 10.1109/iccpeic.2016.7557203
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis on bilingual machine translation systems for English and Tamil

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The co‐authors of this article are active researchers in machine translation (Mrinalini et al, 2018; Mrinalini et al, 2022; Sangavi et al, 2016) and thus based on their research and observations, we intend to extend the translation block using the work done in the above‐mentioned articles to enable translation for other Indian languages.…”
Section: Data and Proposed Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The co‐authors of this article are active researchers in machine translation (Mrinalini et al, 2018; Mrinalini et al, 2022; Sangavi et al, 2016) and thus based on their research and observations, we intend to extend the translation block using the work done in the above‐mentioned articles to enable translation for other Indian languages.…”
Section: Data and Proposed Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this paper, Statistical Machine Translation (SMT) systems developed by the authors (Mrinalini et al, 2018) for English‐to‐Tamil and English‐to‐Hindi translation are used. It is important to note that the linguistic gap between the source and target languages affects the re‐ordering and alignments of words in the translation model (Mrinalini et al, 2016; Sangavi et al, 2016; Vasuki & Sankaravelayuthan, 2013) thus affecting the SMT output. Apart from the linguistic variations in both the languages, the type of training or testing data influences the performance of the SMT (Mrinalini et al, 2016).…”
Section: Effect Of Punctuation On Nlp Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It concerns to capture syntax and syntactic variation in both translated languages. [7] Basically, in this process, the system receives sentences as an input from the users then continues the process by passing it to the parser, in this term, Stanford parser. It may generate some features that is usually used for translating.…”
Section: B Rule-based Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%