Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation 2014
DOI: 10.3115/v1/w14-3302
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Findings of the 2014 Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation

Abstract: This paper presents the results of the WMT14 shared tasks, which included a standard news translation task, a separate medical translation task, a task for run-time estimation of machine translation quality, and a metrics task. This year, 143 machine translation systems from 23 institutions were submitted to the ten translation directions in the standard translation task. An additional 6 anonymized systems were included, and were then evaluated both automatically and manually. The quality estimation task had f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
577
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 555 publications
(581 citation statements)
references
References 61 publications
3
577
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Such scores are comparable to the state-of-the-art results reported recently on the same data sets [91]. The scores measured on the med domain are consistently higher by about 2 BLEU points (27.06-31.45).…”
Section: Baseline Translation Systemssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Such scores are comparable to the state-of-the-art results reported recently on the same data sets [91]. The scores measured on the med domain are consistently higher by about 2 BLEU points (27.06-31.45).…”
Section: Baseline Translation Systemssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…Formiga et al (2013) confirm that ordinal regression makes better predictions as compared to ordering MT outputs, based on separate regression models over absolute scores of adequacy. When it comes to learning from ordinal rankings, Avramidis and Popović (2013) set the state-of-the-art performance for German-English, in the frame of a WMT shared task in QE (Bojar et al, 2013), Previous work has motivated the use of grammatical features focusing in specific structures (eg. Mutton et al, 2007), feature selection was motivated by Specia et al (2009), whereas an analysis of features was done by Felice and Specia (2012); nevertheless all the above work is limited to non-Comparative QE.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We tested HMEANT on a set of four best MT systems (Bojar et al, 2013) for the English-Russian language pair (Table 2).…”
Section: Test Setmentioning
confidence: 99%