Systems and methods for translating textual content

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10984429
  • Patent Number
    10,984,429
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, June 18, 2019
    5 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, April 20, 2021
    3 years ago
Abstract
A prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content in a source language can be determined. A first quantity estimation of first textual content may be determined. The first textual content is to be translated via human translation. A second quantity estimation of second textual content may also be determined. The second textual content is to be translated via machine translation. An indication of a target language is obtained, wherein the source language and the target language form a language pair. The prediction of the cost associated with translating the first textual content and the second textual content from the source language to the target language is then determined. The prediction is based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, and the language pair.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Field of the Invention

The present technology relates generally to costs associated with natural language translation. More specifically, the present technology relates to predicting the cost associated with translating textual content.


Related Art

Machine translation of natural languages is presently an imperfect technology and will likely produce imperfect results in the next several decades. For certain bodies of text, a machine translation system may produce outputs of very high quality, which can be published directly to satisfy a given goal. For example, if automatic translation quality is compelling, some customer support documents translated to a target language could be published on the web in order to enable customers who speak the target language to access information that may not be otherwise available. As such, this may lead to a smaller number of customers making support calls, thus reducing overhead costs. For other documents, in contrast, possibly such as marketing materials, automatic translation quality may be too low to warrant their publication. In such cases, human translators may be necessary to translate these other documents.


A significant barrier to adopting machine translation technology is explained by potential customers not being able to know in advance the extent an existing machine translation system will be able to satisfy their needs. For example, current and projected costs of translating text may be difficult or impossible to accurately determine. Therefore, what is needed is a technology to gauge current and future costs associated with translating textual content.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Embodiments of the present technology allow costs associated with translating textual content to be determined. The present technology may predict the costs of translating existing and expected documents by a combination of human translation and machine translation from a source language to a target language. The documents can include a first textual content identified for human translation and a second textual content identified for machine translation. The cost for translating the documents to the target language may be predicted before the translations are performed.


A prediction of the cost to machine translate the second textual content may be based on a translation quality level associated with one or more portions of the second textual content. For example, a second textual content may be divided into a first portion associated with a higher quality level and a second portion associated with lower quality level. The translation cost associated with the higher quality level may differ then the translation cost associated with the lower quality level. Thus, the predicted cost of translating the second textual content may be determined based on different costs of translating different portions of the textual content via machine translation.


In one claimed embodiment, a method for determining a prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content in a source language is disclosed. The method may include determining a first quantity estimation of first textual content and determining a second quantity estimation of second textual content. The first textual content is to be translated via human translation, whereas the second textual content is to be translated via machine translation. An indication of a target language may also be obtained, wherein the source language and the target language form a language pair. Instructions stored in memory may then be executed using a processor to determine the prediction of the cost associated with translating the first textual content and the second textual content from the source language to the target language. The prediction is based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, and the language pair.


Another claimed embodiment discloses a system for determining a prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content in a source language. The system may include a first assessment module, a second assessment module, a language module, and a cost prediction module, all of which may be stored in memory and executed by a processor to effectuate the respective functionalities attributed thereto. The first assessment module may be executed to obtain a first quantity estimation of first textual content, wherein the first textual content is to be translated via human translation. The second assessment module may be executed to obtain a second quantity estimation of second textual content. The second textual content is to be translated via machine translation. The language module may be executed to obtain an indication of a target language. The source language and the target language form a language pair. The cost prediction module may be executed to determine the prediction of the cost associated with translating the first textual content and the second textual content from the source language to the target language. The prediction is based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, and the language pair.


A computer readable storage medium having a program embodied thereon is also disclosed as a claimed embodiment. The program is executable by a processor to perform a method for determining a prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content in a source language. The method may include determining a first quantity estimation of first textual content, wherein the first textual content is to be translated via human translation. The method may also include determining a second quantity estimation of second textual content, wherein the second textual content is to be translated via machine translation. Obtaining an indication of a target language may be further included in the method. The source language and the target language form a language pair. The method may still further include determining the prediction of the cost associated with translating the first textual content and the second textual content from the source language to the target language. The prediction may be based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, and the language pair.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an exemplary environment for practicing embodiments of the present technology.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram of an exemplary translation application invoked in the environment depicted in FIG. 1.



FIG. 3 is a block diagram of an exemplary translation cost estimation engine included in the translation application.



FIG. 4 is a flowchart of an exemplary method for determining a prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content in a source language.



FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary computing system that may be used to implement an embodiment of the present technology.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EXEMPLARY EMBODIMENTS

The present technology may predict the costs for translating existing and expected documents by a combination of human translation and machine translation. Such a body of textual content can include any amount of text ranging, for example, from a few words to a batch of textual items such as websites, books, articles, or letters. The documents can include a first textual content identified for human translation and a second textual content identified for machine translation. The documents that make up the existing textual content, as well as expected textual content that may be forthcoming in the future, may be translated from a current language to a target language. The cost for translating the documents to the target language may be predicted before the translations are performed.


A prediction of the cost to machine translate the second textual content may be based on a translation quality level associated with one or more portions of the second textual content. Different portions of the second textual content may have a different translation quality level, and a corresponding different cost of translation. For example, a second textual content may be divided into a first portion associated with a higher quality level and a second portion associated with lower quality level. The translation cost associated with the higher quality level may differ then the translation cost associated with the lower quality level. Hence, the predicted cost of translating the second textual content may be determined based on different costs of translating different portions of the textual content via machine translation.


It is noteworthy that machine-generated translations obtained by way of statistical-translation techniques and non-statistical-translation techniques fall within the scope of the present technology. Furthermore, while the present technology is described herein in the context of textual translations, the principles disclosed can likewise be applied to speech translations such as when employed in conjunction with speech recognition technologies.


Referring now to FIG. 1, a block diagram of an exemplary environment 100 is shown in which embodiments of the present technology can be practiced. As depicted, the environment 100 includes a computing device 105 providing a network browser 110 and optionally a client translation application 120, a web server 130, an application server 135 providing a translation application 140, and a third-party web server 150 providing third-party website content 155. Communication between the computing device 105, the web server 130, and the third-party web server 150 is provided by a network 125. Examples of the network 125 include a wide area network (WAN), local area network (LAN), the Internet, an intranet, a public network, a private network, a combination of these, or some other data transfer network. Examples of the computing device 105 include a desktop personal computer (PC), a laptop PC, a pocket PC, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a smart phone, a cellular phone, a portable translation device, and so on. The web server 130, the application server 135, and the third-party web server 150 may each be implemented as one or more servers. An exemplary computing system for implementing the computing device 105, the web server 130, the application server 135, and the third-party web server 150 is described in further detail in connection with FIG. 5. Additionally, other various components (not depicted) that are not necessary for describing the present technology also may be included in the environment 100, in accordance with exemplary embodiments.


As mentioned, the computing device 105 may include the network browser 110. The network browser 110 may retrieve, present, traverse, and otherwise process information located on a network, including content pages. For example, network browser 110 can be implemented as a web browser that can process a content page in the form of a web page. The network browser 110 may provide an interface as part of a content page or web page. The interface can be implemented from content page data received from the third-party web server 150 or the web server 130. Via the interface, the computing device 105 can receive an indication from a user to provide a translation from a source language to a target language along with a cost prediction of that translation. The user may provide the indication via the textual content itself, location data for the textual content such as a link (e.g., URL) associated with the textual content, or other information. The indication may convey a desire to obtain a highly accurate translation or a usable translation based on content included in or associated with the textual content. The indication may be forwarded either to the third-party website content 155 or the web server 130 via the network 125.


The computing device 105, as depicted in FIG. 1, can include the client translation application 120. The client translation application 120 may be a stand-alone executable application residing and executing, at least in part, on the computing device 105. The client translation application 120 may also provide an interface for selecting content to have translated. The client translation application 120 may communicate directly with the web server 130, the application server 135, or the third-party web server 150. In the description herein, it is intended that any functionality performed by translation application 140, including providing an interface for implementing various functionality, can also be implanted by the client translation application 120. In some embodiments, client translation application 120 may be implemented in place of translation application 140, which is indicated by the dashed lines comprising the client translation application 120 in FIG. 1.


The web server 130 may communicate both with the application server 135 and over the network 125, for example to provide content page data to the computing device 105 for rendering in the network browser 110. The content page data may be used by the network browser 110 to provide an interface for selecting an indication of a textual content to translate, whether stored over a network or locally to the computing device 105. The web server 130 can also receive data associated with an indication from the computing device 105. The web server 130 may process the received indication and/or provide the indication, and optionally any textual content data, to the application server 135 for processing by translation application 140.


The application server 135 communicates with web server 130 and other applications, for example the client translation applications 120, and includes the translation application 140. In addition to generating translations, the translation application 140 can generate a cost prediction associated with translating current and forthcoming textual content, as discussed in further detail herein. Both translated textual content and cost predictions may be transmitted to a user over the network 125 by the application server 135 and the web server 130, for example, through the computing device 105.


The translation application 140 may be part of a translation system that translates textual content and predicts translation costs. The translation application 140 is described in further detail in connection with FIG. 2. Furthermore, although the translation application 140 is depicted as being a single component of the environment 100, it is noteworthy that the translation application 140 and constituent elements thereof may be distributed across several computing devices that operate in concert via the network 125.


In some embodiments, a content page for allowing a user to configure translation parameters can be provided through the network browser 110. The translation configuration content page data can be provided to the network browser 110 by the web server 130 and/or by the third-party web server 150. When provided by the third-party web server 150, the third-party web server 150 may access and retrieve information from the translation system (i.e., the web server 130 and/or the application server 135) to provide a content page having an interface for configuring. In exemplary embodiments, the translation application 140 is accessed by the third-party web server 150. A graphical user interface (GUI) may be implemented within a content page by the third-party web server 150, rendered in the network browser 110, and accessed by a user via the network browser 110 of the computing device 105. According to exemplary embodiments, the GUI can enable a user to identify a document to be translated and select various options related to translating the documents.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram of an exemplary translation application 140 invoked in the environment 100. The translation application 140, as depicted, includes a communications module 205, an interface module 210, a translation engine 215, and a translation cost estimation engine 220. Although FIG. 2 depicts one translation engine 215, the translation application 140 may comprise any number of translation engines and may be in communication with other translation engines via the network 125. The translation engine 215 is associated with the training dataset 225. The training dataset 225 may or may not be included in the translation application 140. Programs comprising engines and modules of the translation application 140 may be stored in memory of a computing system such as the computing device 105, the web server 130, the application server 135, the third-party web server 150, or any computing device that includes the translation application 140. Additionally, the constituent engines and modules can be executed by a processor of a computing system to effectuate respective functionalities attributed thereto. It is noteworthy that the translation application 140 can be composed of more or fewer modules and engines (or combinations of the same) and still fall within the scope of the present technology. For example, the functionalities of the communications module 205 and the functionalities of the interface module 210 may be combined into a single module or engine.


When executed, the communications module 205 allows an indication to be received via a user interface to provide a cost prediction for translating textual content from a source language to a target language. Such a user interface may include the network browser 110 or a GUI provided by the third-party website content 155. The communications module 205 may also facilitate accessing the textual content for which a cost prediction is to be determined such as in response to an indication by a user. The textual content can be accessed based on location information associated with the textual content. Additionally, the textual content can be downloaded from the computing device 105, third-party web server 150, or any other site or device accessible via the network 125. Furthermore, the communications module 205 can be executed such that a cost prediction associated with translating the textual content is outputted from the translation application 140 to devices accessible via the network 125 (e.g., the computing device 105).


The interface module 210 can be executed to provide a graphical user interface through network browser 110, for example as a content page, that enables a user to request the cost prediction. The graphical user interface may also provide various options to a user relating to, for example, pricing or translation domain. According to various embodiments, the graphical user interface may be presented to a user as a content page for network browser 110 via the third-party web server 150 or directly by client translation application 120 at the computing device 105.


The translation engine 215 comprises a machine translation engine capable of translating from a source language to a target language. Such translation capability may result from training the translation engine 215 on various training data. Higher translation accuracy may be achieved for domain-specific translations when a machine translation engine is trained using a training dataset associated with the same domain or similar subject matter as documents being translated. For example, a translation of a car-repair manual may be of higher quality if the machine translation engine employed was trained using a car-repair-domain-specific training dataset compared to, say, a general training dataset or an unrelated-domain-specific training dataset. In some embodiments, the translation application 140 may include more than one translation engine 215. Additionally, the translation engine 215 may be based on statistical-translation techniques, non-statistical-translation techniques, or a combination thereof.


As depicted in FIG. 2, the translation engines 215 is associated with the training dataset 225. According to other exemplary embodiments, the translation engine 215 can be associated with any number of training datasets. The training dataset 225 may comprise documents in source languages and corresponding translations of those documents in target languages (i.e., parallel corpora). The translated documents may be human-generated or machine-generated. The training dataset 225 may be domain-specific or generic. Accordingly, the translation engine 215 may be associated with specific subject matter. For example, the translation engine 215 may be associated with consumer electronics or with agriculture.


According to exemplary embodiments, the translation cost estimation engine 220 is executable to generate a prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content from a source language to a target language. The cost prediction may be indicative of translational costs associated with translating a portion of the textual content using human translators and another portion of the textual content using machine translation. The translation cost estimation engine 220 is described in further detail in connection with FIG. 3.



FIG. 3 is a block diagram of an exemplary translation cost estimation engine 220 included in the translation application 140. The translation cost estimation engine 220 provides a cost prediction associated with translating current and forthcoming textual content. The depicted translation cost estimation engine 220 includes a first assessment module 305, a second assessment module 310, a language module 315, a cost prediction module 320, a quality prediction module 325, a text evaluation module 330, a report generation module 335, and a content analysis module 340, all of which may be stored in memory and executed by a processor to effectuate the functionalities attributed thereto. Furthermore, the translation cost estimation engine 220 can be composed of more or fewer modules (or combinations of the same) and still fall within the scope of the present technology. For example, the functionalities of the first assessment module 305 and the functionalities of the second assessment module 310 may be combined into a single module or engine.


The first assessment module 305 can be executed to obtain a first quantity estimation of first textual content. The first textual content is to be translated via human translation. Generally speaking, the first textual content includes text for which a near-perfect translation is desired. As such, human translation is invoked rather than machine translation. An example of the first textual content might include material that would suffer greatly if a nuance or underlying message was not effectively translated, such as marketing materials.


The first quantity estimation can be obtained in a number of ways. The first quantity estimation may be determined by a human. For example, a customer may select a quantity of textual material to be translated by a human, rather than by a machine. Alternatively, the first quantity estimation may be automatically determined, such as through execution of the text evaluation module 330, as discussed further herein. It is noteworthy that the first quantity estimation can be any portion of the total textual content to ultimately be translated, including all textual content or no textual content.


Execution of the second assessment module 310 allows a second quantity estimation of second textual content to be obtained. The second textual content is to be translated via machine translation. In general, the second textual content includes text for which a potentially imperfect translation is acceptable. Thus, machine translation is used, rather than human translation. The second textual content includes material where the gist is conveyable, even if grammar or word choice in not optimal. Technical documentation or casual communication such as chat can be examples of the second textual content.


Like the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation can be obtained in a number of ways. The second quantity estimation may be determined by a human. For example, a customer may select a quantity of textual material to be translated by a machine, rather than by a human. Alternatively, the second quantity estimation may be automatically determined, such as through execution of the text evaluation module 330, as discussed further herein. It is noteworthy that the second quantity estimation can be any portion of the total textual content to ultimately be translated, including all textual content or no textual content.


The language module 315 is executed to obtain an indication of a target language, such that the source language and the target language form a language pair. The indication of the target language may be obtained from the user via the interface module 210.


The cost prediction module 320 may be executed to determine the prediction of the cost associated with translating the first textual content and the second textual content from the source language to the target language. The prediction may be based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, and the language pair obtained, respectively, by the first assessment module 305, second assessment module 310, and language module 315.


The quality prediction module 325 is executable to predict a quality level attainable via machine translation of at least a portion of the second textual content. The quality level may be predicted in a number of manners. Exemplary approaches for determining quality levels are disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/572,021 filed Oct. 1, 2009 and entitled “Providing Machine-Generated Translations and Corresponding Trust Levels,” which is incorporated herein by reference. In some embodiments, the quality level can be predicted without translating the second textual content. This may be achieved by examining the alignment between the second textual content and training data used to train a given machine translation engine.


It is noteworthy that different portions of the second textual content can each be associated with a different quality estimation. For example, a second textual content may be divided into four portions of 10%, 40%, 30%, and 20% of the total second textual content. The four portions may each be associated with a different quality level. The resulting cost prediction for translating the second textual content may be determined as the sum of the products of content volume and corresponding quality-based translation cost. For four portions or volumes of L1, L2, L3 and L4 and translation costs of C1, C2, C3 and C4, wherein each translation cost is based on a translation quality associated with a particular portion, the cost prediction for the second textual content may be determined as follows:

C=L1*C1+L2*C2+L3*C3+L4*C4


Furthermore, since machine-translated textual content can potentially require post-editing by a human, a higher predicted quality level may correspond to a lower prediction of the cost associated with translating the second textual content, relative to a lower predicted quality level.


Execution of the text evaluation module 330 supports determination of the quantity estimations of the first and second textual content. For example, the text evaluation module 330 can be executed to identify existing textual content to be translated via human translation, such that the existing textual content to be translated via human translation forms at least a portion of the first quantity estimation obtained by the first assessment module 305. The text evaluation module 330 may also be executed to estimate forthcoming textual content to be translated via human translation, such that the forthcoming textual content to be translated via human translation forms at least a portion of the first quantity estimation obtained by the first assessment module 305.


In addition, the text evaluation module 330 can be executed to identify existing textual content to be translated via machine translation, such that the existing textual content to be translated via machine translation forms at least a portion of the second quantity estimation obtained by the second assessment module 310. The text evaluation module 330 can, furthermore, be executed to estimate forthcoming textual content to be translated via machine translation, such that the forthcoming textual content to be translated via machine translation forms at least a portion of the second quantity estimation obtained by the second assessment module 310.


The report generation module 335 can be executed to generate a report that includes a schedule of cost options associated with the prediction of the cost. According to exemplary embodiments, the cost options are based at least in part on different quantities of the first textual content being translated and different quantities of the second textual content being translated. For example, a customer may want 100% of the first textual content to be translated by a human, but only 60% of the second textual content to be translated by a machine.


Execution of the content analysis module 340 allows determination of a machine translation system to perform the machine translation. Such a determination may be based on content associated with the second textual content. Exemplary approaches for determining which available translation system would best translated given textual content is described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/510,913 filed Jul. 28, 2009 and entitled “Translating Documents Based on Content,” which is incorporated herein by reference.



FIG. 4 is a flowchart of an exemplary method 400 for determining a prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content in a source language. The steps of the method 400 may be performed in varying orders. Additionally, steps may be added or subtracted from the method 400 and still fall within the scope of the present technology.


In step 405, a first quantity of first textual content is estimated, wherein the first textual content is to be translated via human translation. The first assessment module 305 may be executed to perform step 405. In alternative embodiments, the text evaluation module 330 may be executed in conjunction with the first assessment module 305 to perform step 405.


In step 410, a second quantity of second textual content is estimated, where the second textual content is to be translated via machine translation. Step 410 may be performed through execution of the second assessment module 310. Alternatively, the text evaluation module 330 and the second assessment module 310 can be executed conjunctively to perform step 410.


In step 415, an indication of a target language is obtained, such that the source language and the target language form a language pair. The language module 315 can be executed to perform step 415.


In step 420, the prediction of the cost associated with translating the first textual content and the second textual content from the source language to the target language is determined. The prediction is based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, and the language pair. Step 420 can be performed by executing the cost prediction module 320. The prediction of the cost associated with translating the second textual content may be based on one or more predicted quality levels, wherein each quality level may be associated with a portion of the second textual content.



FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary computing system 500 that may be used to implement an embodiment of the present technology. The computing system 500 may be implemented in the contexts of the likes of the computing device 105, a server implementing the third-party website content 155, and a server implementing the translation application 140. The computing system 500 includes one or more processors 510 and main memory 520. Main memory 520 stores, in part, instructions and data for execution by processor 510. Main memory 520 can store the executable code when in operation. The computing system 500 further includes a mass storage device 530, portable storage device 540 (hereinafter portable storage medium drive(s)), output devices 550, user input devices 560, a display system 570 (hereinafter graphics display), and peripherals 580 (hereinafter peripheral device(s)).


The components shown in FIG. 5 are depicted as being connected via a single bus 590. The components may be connected through one or more data transport means. The processor 510 and the main memory 520 may be connected via a local microprocessor bus, and the mass storage device 530, the peripheral devices 580, the portable storage medium drive(s) 540, and display system 570 may be connected via one or more input/output (I/O) buses.


The mass storage device 530, which may be implemented with a magnetic disk drive or an optical disk drive, is a non-volatile storage device for storing data and instructions for use by the processor 510. The mass storage device 530 can store the system software for implementing embodiments of the present technology for purposes of loading that software into the main memory 520.


The portable storage device 540 operates in conjunction with a portable non-volatile storage medium, such as a floppy disk, compact disk, digital video disc, or USB storage device, to input and output data and code to and from the computer system 500 of FIG. 5. The system software for implementing embodiments of the present technology may be stored on such a portable medium and input to the computer system 500 via the portable storage device 540.


The input devices 560 provide a portion of a user interface. The input devices 560 may include an alpha-numeric keypad, such as a keyboard, for inputting alpha-numeric and other information, or a pointing device, such as a mouse, a trackball, stylus, or cursor direction keys. Additionally, the computing system 500 as shown in FIG. 5 includes the output devices 550. Suitable output devices include speakers, printers, network interfaces, and monitors.


The display system 570 may include a liquid crystal display (LCD) or other suitable display device. The display system 570 receives textual and graphical information, and processes the information for output to the display device.


The peripheral device(s) 580 may include any type of computer support device to add additional functionality to the computer system. The peripheral device(s) 580 may include a modem or a router.


The components contained in the computer system 500 of FIG. 5 are those typically found in computer systems that may be suitable for use with embodiments of the present technology and are intended to represent a broad category of such computer components that are well known in the art. Thus, the computer system 500 of FIG. 5 can be a personal computer, hand held computing device, telephone, mobile computing device, workstation, server, minicomputer, mainframe computer, or any other computing device. The computer can also include different bus configurations, networked platforms, multi-processor platforms, etc. Various operating systems can be used including Unix, Linux, Windows, Macintosh OS, Palm OS, webOS, Android, iPhone OS and other suitable operating systems.


It is noteworthy that any hardware platform suitable for performing the processing described herein is suitable for use with the technology. Computer-readable storage media refer to any medium or media that participate in providing instructions to a central processing unit (CPU), a processor, a microcontroller, or the like. Such media can take forms including, but not limited to, non-volatile and volatile media such as optical or magnetic disks and dynamic memory, respectively. Common forms of computer-readable storage media include a floppy disk, a flexible disk, a hard disk, magnetic tape, any other magnetic storage medium, a CD-ROM disk, digital video disk (DVD), any other optical storage medium, RAM, PROM, EPROM, a FLASHEPROM, any other memory chip or cartridge.


Various forms of transmission media may be involved in carrying one or more sequences of one or more instructions to a CPU for execution. A bus carries the data to system RAM, from which a CPU retrieves and executes the instructions. The instructions received by system RAM can optionally be stored on a fixed disk either before or after execution by a CPU.


While various embodiments have been described above, it should be understood that they have been presented by way of example only, and not limitation. The descriptions are not intended to limit the scope of the technology to the particular forms set forth herein. Thus, the breadth and scope of a preferred embodiment should not be limited by any of the above-described exemplary embodiments. It should be understood that the above description is illustrative and not restrictive. To the contrary, the present descriptions are intended to cover such alternatives, modifications, and equivalents as may be included within the spirit and scope of the technology as defined by the appended claims and otherwise appreciated by one of ordinary skill in the art. The scope of the technology should, therefore, be determined not with reference to the above description, but instead should be determined with reference to the appended claims along with their full scope of equivalents.

Claims
  • 1. A method comprising: receiving an estimate of a first quantity of a first type of textual content of documents of a source language, the first type of textual content including text expected to be translated via human translation;receiving an estimate of a second quantity of a second type of textual content of the documents, the second type of textual content different from the first type of textual content, the second type of textual content including text expected to be translated via machine-generated translation;executing instructions stored in a memory by a processor to obtain an indication of a target language, the source language and the target language forming a language pair;training a machine translation system for the language pair using a training dataset;comparing a machine-generated target-language corpus with a human-generated target-language corpus;mapping features between the machine-generated target-language corpus and the human-generated target-language corpus using the comparison;predicting a quality level of the trained machine translation system using the mapping;executing instructions stored in a memory by the processor to determine a prediction of a first cost associated with translating the first type of textual content and a second cost associated with the second type of textual content from the source language to the target language, the prediction based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, the predicted quality level, and the language pair;selecting the trained machine translation system to perform machine translations of the second type of textual content based on the predicted quality level of translation of the second type of textual content by the machine translation system;receiving text for translation;receiving a selection of a quantity of the received text that is of the second type of textual content to be translated by a machine translation system; andperforming a machine translation of the selected quantity of the received text of the second type of textual content using the selected machine translation system.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the second quantity estimation is associated with at least one predicted quality level attainable via machine translation of the second textual content.
  • 3. The method of claim 2, wherein each predicted quality level is associated with a translation cost, the amount of the translation cost corresponding to the quality of translation.
  • 4. The method of claim 2, wherein the predicted quality level is determined without translating the second type of textual content.
  • 5. The method of claim 2, wherein a plurality of predicted quality levels are each associated with a different translation cost and a different portion of the second type of textual content.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein estimating the first quantity includes identifying existing textual content to be translated via human translation.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein estimating the first quantity includes estimating expected textual content to be translated via human translation.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein estimating the second quantity includes identifying existing textual content to be translated via machine translation.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein estimating the second quantity includes estimating expected textual content to be translated via machine translation.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating a report that includes a schedule of cost options associated with the prediction of the cost, the cost options based at least in part on different quantities of the first type of textual content being translated and different quantities of the second type of textual content being translated.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining a machine translation system to perform the machine translation, the determination of the machine translation system based on content associated with the second type of textual content.
  • 12. A system for determining a prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content in a source language, the system comprising: a first assessment module stored in a memory of a smartphone and executable by the smartphone to obtain a first quantity estimation of a first type of textual content of documents of a source language, the first type of textual content including text expected to be translated via human translation;a second assessment module stored in a memory of the smartphone and executable by the smartphone to obtain a second quantity estimation of a second quantity of a second type of textual content of the documents, the second type of textual content different from the first type of textual content, the second type of textual content including text expected to be translated via machine-generated translation;a language module stored in a memory and executable by a processor to obtain an indication of a target language, a source language and the target language forming a language pair; anda cost prediction module stored in a memory and executable by the smartphone to: compare a machine-generated target-language corpus with a human-generated target-language corpus;map features between the machine-generated target-language corpus and the human-generated target-language corpus using the comparison;determine a quality level associated with translational accuracy of future machine-generated translations using the mapping, anddetermine a prediction of a first cost associated with translating the first type of textual content and a second cost associated with the second type of textual content from the source language to the target language, the prediction based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, the predicted quality level, and the language pair.
  • 13. The system of claim 12, further comprising a quality estimation module stored in memory and executable by a processor to predict a quality level attainable via machine translation of at least a portion of the second type of textual content.
  • 14. The system of claim 13, wherein a higher predicted quality level corresponds to a lower prediction of the cost associated with translating the second type of textual content, relative to a lower predicted quality level.
  • 15. The system of claim 13, wherein the quality level is predicted without translating the second type of textual content.
  • 16. The system of claim 13, wherein different portions of the second type of textual content are each associated with a different quality estimation.
  • 17. The system of claim 12, further comprising a text evaluation module stored in memory and executable by a processer to perform at least one of the following: identify existing textual content to be translated via human translation, the existing textual content to be translated via human translation forming at least a portion of the first quantity estimation obtained by the first assessment module;estimate forthcoming textual content to be translated via human translation, the forthcoming textual content to be translated via human translation forming at least a portion of the first quantity estimation obtained by the first assessment module;identify existing textual content to be translated via machine translation, the existing textual content to be translated via machine translation forming at least a portion of the second quantity estimation obtained by the second assessment module; andestimate forthcoming textual content to be translated via machine translation, the forthcoming textual content to be translated via machine translation forming at least a portion of the second quantity estimation obtained by the second assessment module.
  • 18. The system of claim 12, further comprising a report generation module stored in memory and executable by a processor to generate a report that includes a schedule of cost options associated with the prediction of the cost, the cost options based at least in part on different quantities of the first type of textual content being translated and different quantities of the second textual content being translated.
  • 19. The system of claim 12, further comprising a content language module stored in memory and executable by a processor to determine a machine translation system to perform the machine translation, the determination of the machine translation system based on content associated with the second type of textual content.
  • 20. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions embodied thereon, the instructions being executable by a processor to perform a method for determining a prediction of the cost associated with translating textual content in a source language, the method comprising: receiving an estimate of a first quantity of a first type of textual content of documents of the source language, the first type of textual content including text expected to be translated via human translation;receiving an estimate of a second quantity of a second type of textual content of the documents, the second type of textual content different from the first type of textual content, the second type of textual content including text expected to be translated via machine-generated translation;executing instructions stored in a memory by a processor to obtain an indication of a target language, the source language and the target language forming a language pair;training a machine translation system for the language pair using a training dataset;comparing a machine-generated target-language corpus with a human-generated target-language corpus;mapping features between the machine-generated target-language corpus and the human-generated target-language corpus using the comparison;predicting a quality level of the trained machine translation system using the mapping;executing instructions stored in a memory by the processor to determine a prediction of a first cost associated with translating the first type of textual content and a second cost associated with the second type of textual content from the source language to the target language, the prediction based at least in part on the first quantity estimation, the second quantity estimation, the predicted quality level, and the language pair;selecting the trained machine translation system to perform machine translations of the second type of textual content based on the predicted quality level of translation of the second type of textual content by the machine translation system;receiving text for translation;receiving a selection of a quantity of the received text that is of the second type of textual content to be translated by a machine translation system; andperforming a machine translation of the selected quantity of the received text of the second type of textual content using the selected machine translation system.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

The present application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/720,536 filed Mar. 9, 2010, issued as U.S Pat. No. 10,417,646 on Sep. 17, 2019, and entitled “Predicting the Cost Associated with Translating Textual Content.” The present application is also related to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/510,913 filed Jul. 28, 2009, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,990,064 on Mar. 24, 2015, and entitled “Translating Documents Based on Content,” and to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/572,021 filed Oct. 1, 2009, issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,380,486 on Feb. 19, 2013, and entitled “Providing Machine-Generated Translations and Corresponding Trust Levels.” The disclosures of all the aforementioned applications are incorporated herein by reference.

US Referenced Citations (661)
Number Name Date Kind
4055907 Henson Nov 1977 A
4502128 Okajima et al. Feb 1985 A
4509137 Yoshida Apr 1985 A
4599691 Sakaki et al. Jul 1986 A
4615002 Innes Sep 1986 A
4661924 Okamoto et al. Apr 1987 A
4787038 Doi et al. Nov 1988 A
4791587 Doi Dec 1988 A
4800522 Miyao et al. Jan 1989 A
4814987 Miyao et al. Mar 1989 A
4845658 Gifford Jul 1989 A
4916614 Kaji Apr 1990 A
4920499 Skeirik Apr 1990 A
4942526 Okajima et al. Jul 1990 A
4980829 Okajima et al. Dec 1990 A
5020112 Chou May 1991 A
5088038 Tanaka et al. Feb 1992 A
5091876 Kumano et al. Feb 1992 A
5146405 Church Sep 1992 A
5167504 Mann Dec 1992 A
5175684 Chong Dec 1992 A
5181163 Nakajima et al. Jan 1993 A
5212730 Wheatley et al. May 1993 A
5218537 Hemphill et al. Jun 1993 A
5220503 Suzuki et al. Jun 1993 A
5267156 Nomiyama Nov 1993 A
5268839 Kaji Dec 1993 A
5275569 Watkins Jan 1994 A
5295068 Nishino et al. Mar 1994 A
5302132 Corder Apr 1994 A
5311429 Tominaga May 1994 A
5351189 Doi Sep 1994 A
5387104 Corder Feb 1995 A
5408410 Kaji Apr 1995 A
5418717 Su et al. May 1995 A
5432948 Davis et al. Jul 1995 A
5442546 Kaji et al. Aug 1995 A
5458425 Torok Oct 1995 A
5477450 Takeda et al. Dec 1995 A
5477451 Brown et al. Dec 1995 A
5488725 Turtle et al. Jan 1996 A
5495413 Kutsumi et al. Feb 1996 A
5497319 Chong et al. Mar 1996 A
5510981 Berger et al. Apr 1996 A
5528491 Kuno et al. Jun 1996 A
5535120 Chong et al. Jul 1996 A
5541836 Church et al. Jul 1996 A
5541837 Fushimoto Jul 1996 A
5548508 Nagami Aug 1996 A
5587902 Kugimiya Dec 1996 A
5640575 Maruyama Jun 1997 A
5644774 Fukumochi et al. Jul 1997 A
5675815 Yamauchi et al. Oct 1997 A
5687383 Nakayama et al. Nov 1997 A
5696980 Brew Dec 1997 A
5708780 Levergood et al. Jan 1998 A
5715314 Payne et al. Feb 1998 A
5724424 Gifford Mar 1998 A
5724593 Hargrave, III et al. Mar 1998 A
5752052 Richardson et al. May 1998 A
5754972 Baker et al. May 1998 A
5761631 Nasukawa Jun 1998 A
5761689 Rayson et al. Jun 1998 A
5768603 Brown et al. Jun 1998 A
5779486 Ho et al. Jul 1998 A
5781884 Pereira et al. Jul 1998 A
5794178 Caid et al. Aug 1998 A
5805832 Brown et al. Sep 1998 A
5806032 Sproat Sep 1998 A
5812776 Gifford Sep 1998 A
5819265 Ravin et al. Oct 1998 A
5826219 Kutsumi Oct 1998 A
5826220 Takeda et al. Oct 1998 A
5845143 Yamauchi et al. Dec 1998 A
5848385 Poznanski et al. Dec 1998 A
5848386 Motoyama Dec 1998 A
5850561 Church et al. Dec 1998 A
5855015 Shoham Dec 1998 A
5864788 Kutsumi Jan 1999 A
5867811 O'Donoghue Feb 1999 A
5870706 Alshawi Feb 1999 A
5873056 Liddy Feb 1999 A
5893134 O'Donoghue et al. Apr 1999 A
5903858 Saraki May 1999 A
5907821 Kaji et al. May 1999 A
5909492 Payne et al. Jun 1999 A
5909681 Passera et al. Jun 1999 A
5917944 Wakisaka et al. Jun 1999 A
5930746 Ting Jul 1999 A
5960384 Brash Sep 1999 A
5963205 Sotomayor Oct 1999 A
5966685 Flanagan et al. Oct 1999 A
5966686 Heidorn et al. Oct 1999 A
5974372 Barnes Oct 1999 A
5983169 Kozma Nov 1999 A
5987402 Murata et al. Nov 1999 A
5987404 Della Pietra et al. Nov 1999 A
5991710 Papineni et al. Nov 1999 A
5995922 Penteroudakis et al. Nov 1999 A
6018617 Sweitzer et al. Jan 2000 A
6031984 Walser Feb 2000 A
6032111 Mohri Feb 2000 A
6044344 Kanevsky Mar 2000 A
6047252 Kumano et al. Apr 2000 A
6049785 Gifford Apr 2000 A
6064819 Franssen et al. May 2000 A
6064951 Park et al. May 2000 A
6073143 Nishikawa et al. Jun 2000 A
6077085 Parry et al. Jun 2000 A
6085162 Cherny Jul 2000 A
6092034 McCarley et al. Jul 2000 A
6119077 Shinozaki Sep 2000 A
6119078 Kobayakawa et al. Sep 2000 A
6131082 Hargrave, III et al. Oct 2000 A
6161082 Goldberg et al. Dec 2000 A
6182014 Kenyon et al. Jan 2001 B1
6182026 Tillmann et al. Jan 2001 B1
6182027 Nasukawa et al. Jan 2001 B1
6185524 Carus et al. Feb 2001 B1
6195649 Gifford Feb 2001 B1
6199051 Gifford Mar 2001 B1
6205437 Gifford Mar 2001 B1
6205456 Nakao Mar 2001 B1
6206700 Brown et al. Mar 2001 B1
6212634 Geer et al. Apr 2001 B1
6223150 Duan et al. Apr 2001 B1
6233544 Alshawi May 2001 B1
6233545 Datig May 2001 B1
6233546 Datig May 2001 B1
6236958 Lange et al. May 2001 B1
6269351 Black Jul 2001 B1
6275789 Moser et al. Aug 2001 B1
6278967 Akers et al. Aug 2001 B1
6278969 King et al. Aug 2001 B1
6279112 O'toole, Jr. et al. Aug 2001 B1
6285978 Bernth et al. Sep 2001 B1
6289302 Kuo Sep 2001 B1
6304841 Berger et al. Oct 2001 B1
6311152 Bai et al. Oct 2001 B1
6317708 Witbrock et al. Nov 2001 B1
6327568 Joost Dec 2001 B1
6330529 Ito Dec 2001 B1
6330530 Horiguchi et al. Dec 2001 B1
6356864 Foltz et al. Mar 2002 B1
6356865 Franz et al. Mar 2002 B1
6360196 Poznanski et al. Mar 2002 B1
6389387 Poznanski et al. May 2002 B1
6393388 Franz et al. May 2002 B1
6393389 Chanod et al. May 2002 B1
6415250 van den Akker Jul 2002 B1
6415257 Junqua Jul 2002 B1
6449599 Payne et al. Sep 2002 B1
6460015 Hetherington et al. Oct 2002 B1
6470306 Pringle et al. Oct 2002 B1
6473729 Gastaldo et al. Oct 2002 B1
6473896 Hicken et al. Oct 2002 B1
6477524 Taskiran Nov 2002 B1
6480698 Ho et al. Nov 2002 B2
6490358 Geer et al. Dec 2002 B1
6490549 Ulicny et al. Dec 2002 B1
6490563 Hon Dec 2002 B2
6498921 Ho et al. Dec 2002 B1
6502064 Miyahira et al. Dec 2002 B1
6529865 Duan et al. Mar 2003 B1
6535842 Roche et al. Mar 2003 B1
6587844 Mohri Jul 2003 B1
6598046 Goldberg et al. Jul 2003 B1
6604101 Chan et al. Aug 2003 B1
6609087 Miller et al. Aug 2003 B1
6647364 Yumura et al. Nov 2003 B1
6658627 Gallup Dec 2003 B1
6691279 Yoden et al. Feb 2004 B2
6704741 Lively, Jr. et al. Mar 2004 B1
6745161 Arnold et al. Jun 2004 B1
6745176 Probert, Jr. et al. Jun 2004 B2
6757646 Marchisio Jun 2004 B2
6778949 Duan et al. Aug 2004 B2
6782356 Lopke Aug 2004 B1
6810374 Kang Oct 2004 B2
6848080 Lee et al. Jan 2005 B1
6857022 Scanlan Feb 2005 B1
6865528 Huang Mar 2005 B1
6885985 Hull Apr 2005 B2
6901361 Portilla May 2005 B1
6904402 Wang et al. Jun 2005 B1
6910003 Arnold et al. Jun 2005 B1
6920419 Kitamura Jul 2005 B2
6952665 Shimomura et al. Oct 2005 B1
6976207 Rujan Dec 2005 B1
6983239 Epstein Jan 2006 B1
6990439 Xun Jan 2006 B2
6993473 Cartus Jan 2006 B2
6996518 Jones et al. Feb 2006 B2
6996520 Levin Feb 2006 B2
6999925 Fischer et al. Feb 2006 B2
7013262 Tokuda et al. Mar 2006 B2
7013264 Dolan Mar 2006 B2
7016827 Ramaswamy et al. Mar 2006 B1
7016977 Dunsmoir et al. Mar 2006 B1
7024351 Wang Apr 2006 B2
7031908 Huang Apr 2006 B1
7031911 Zhou et al. Apr 2006 B2
7050964 Menzes et al. May 2006 B2
7054803 Eisele May 2006 B2
7085708 Manson Aug 2006 B2
7089493 Hatori et al. Aug 2006 B2
7103531 Moore Sep 2006 B2
7107204 Liu et al. Sep 2006 B1
7107215 Ghali Sep 2006 B2
7113903 Riccardi et al. Sep 2006 B1
7124092 O'toole, Jr. et al. Oct 2006 B2
7143036 Weise Nov 2006 B2
7146358 Gravano et al. Dec 2006 B1
7149688 Schalkwyk Dec 2006 B2
7171348 Scanlan Jan 2007 B2
7174289 Sukehiro Feb 2007 B2
7177792 Knight et al. Feb 2007 B2
7191115 Moore Mar 2007 B2
7191447 Ellis et al. Mar 2007 B1
7194403 Okura et al. Mar 2007 B2
7197451 Carter et al. Mar 2007 B1
7200550 Menezes et al. Apr 2007 B2
7206736 Moore Apr 2007 B2
7207005 Laktritz Apr 2007 B2
7209875 Quirk et al. Apr 2007 B2
7219051 Moore May 2007 B2
7239998 Xun Jul 2007 B2
7249012 Moore Jul 2007 B2
7249013 Al-Onaizan et al. Jul 2007 B2
7272639 Levergood et al. Sep 2007 B1
7283950 Pournasseh et al. Oct 2007 B2
7295962 Marcu Nov 2007 B2
7295963 Richardson et al. Nov 2007 B2
7302392 Thenthiruperai et al. Nov 2007 B1
7319949 Pinkham Jan 2008 B2
7328156 Meliksetian et al. Feb 2008 B2
7333927 Lee Feb 2008 B2
7340388 Soricut et al. Mar 2008 B2
7346487 Li Mar 2008 B2
7346493 Ringger et al. Mar 2008 B2
7349839 Moore Mar 2008 B2
7349845 Coffman et al. Mar 2008 B2
7353165 Zhou Apr 2008 B2
7356457 Pinkham et al. Apr 2008 B2
7369984 Fairweather May 2008 B2
7369998 Sarich et al. May 2008 B2
7373291 Garst May 2008 B2
7383542 Richardson et al. Jun 2008 B2
7389222 Langmead et al. Jun 2008 B1
7389223 Atkin Jun 2008 B2
7389234 Schmid et al. Jun 2008 B2
7403890 Roushar Jul 2008 B2
7409332 Moore Aug 2008 B2
7409333 Wilkinson et al. Aug 2008 B2
7447623 Appleby Nov 2008 B2
7448040 Ellis et al. Nov 2008 B2
7451125 Bangalore Nov 2008 B2
7454326 Marcu et al. Nov 2008 B2
7496497 Liu Feb 2009 B2
7509313 Colledge Mar 2009 B2
7516062 Chen et al. Apr 2009 B2
7533013 Marcu May 2009 B2
7536295 Cancedda et al. May 2009 B2
7546235 Brockett et al. Jun 2009 B2
7552053 Gao et al. Jun 2009 B2
7565281 Appleby Jul 2009 B2
7574347 Wang Aug 2009 B2
7580828 D'Agostini Aug 2009 B2
7580830 Al-Onaizan et al. Aug 2009 B2
7584092 Brockett et al. Sep 2009 B2
7587307 Cancedda et al. Sep 2009 B2
7620538 Marcu et al. Nov 2009 B2
7620549 Di Cristo et al. Nov 2009 B2
7620632 Andrews Nov 2009 B2
7624005 Koehn et al. Nov 2009 B2
7624020 Yamada et al. Nov 2009 B2
7627479 Travieso et al. Dec 2009 B2
7636656 Nieh Dec 2009 B1
7668782 Reistad et al. Feb 2010 B1
7680646 Lux-Pogodalla et al. Mar 2010 B2
7680647 Moore Mar 2010 B2
7689405 Marcu Mar 2010 B2
7698124 Menezes et al. Apr 2010 B2
7698125 Graehl et al. Apr 2010 B2
7707025 Whitelock Apr 2010 B2
7711545 Koehn May 2010 B2
7716037 Precoda et al. May 2010 B2
7734459 Menezes Jun 2010 B2
7739102 Bender Jun 2010 B2
7739286 Sethy Jun 2010 B2
7788087 Corston-Oliver Aug 2010 B2
7801720 Satake et al. Sep 2010 B2
7813918 Muslea et al. Oct 2010 B2
7822596 Elgazzar et al. Oct 2010 B2
7865358 Green Jan 2011 B2
7925493 Watanabe Apr 2011 B2
7925494 Cheng et al. Apr 2011 B2
7945437 Mount et al. May 2011 B2
7957953 Moore Jun 2011 B2
7974833 Soricut et al. Jul 2011 B2
7974843 Schneider Jul 2011 B2
7974976 Yahia et al. Jul 2011 B2
7983896 Ross et al. Jul 2011 B2
7983897 Chin et al. Jul 2011 B2
8060360 He Nov 2011 B2
8078450 Anisimovich Dec 2011 B2
8135575 Dean Mar 2012 B1
8145472 Shore et al. Mar 2012 B2
8195447 Anismovich Jun 2012 B2
8214196 Yamada et al. Jul 2012 B2
8219382 Kim et al. Jul 2012 B2
8234106 Marcu et al. Jul 2012 B2
8239186 Chin Aug 2012 B2
8239207 Seligman et al. Aug 2012 B2
8244519 Bicici et al. Aug 2012 B2
8249854 Nikitin Aug 2012 B2
8265923 Chatterjee et al. Sep 2012 B2
8275600 Bilac et al. Sep 2012 B2
8286185 Ellis et al. Oct 2012 B2
8296127 Marcu et al. Oct 2012 B2
8315850 Furuuchi et al. Nov 2012 B2
8326598 Macherey et al. Dec 2012 B1
8352244 Gao et al. Jan 2013 B2
8364463 Miyamoto Jan 2013 B2
8380486 Soricut et al. Feb 2013 B2
8386234 Uchimoto et al. Feb 2013 B2
8423346 Seo et al. Apr 2013 B2
8433556 Fraser et al. Apr 2013 B2
8442812 Ehsani May 2013 B2
8442813 Popat May 2013 B1
8468149 Lung et al. Jun 2013 B1
8504351 Waibel et al. Aug 2013 B2
8521506 Lancaster et al. Aug 2013 B2
8527260 Best Sep 2013 B2
8543563 Nikoulina et al. Sep 2013 B1
8548794 Koehn Oct 2013 B2
8554591 Reistad et al. Oct 2013 B2
8594992 Kuhn et al. Nov 2013 B2
8600728 Knight et al. Dec 2013 B2
8606900 Levergood et al. Dec 2013 B1
8612203 Foster et al. Dec 2013 B2
8612205 Hanneman et al. Dec 2013 B2
8615388 Li Dec 2013 B2
8615389 Marcu Dec 2013 B1
8635327 Levergood et al. Jan 2014 B1
8635539 Young et al. Jan 2014 B2
8655642 Fux et al. Feb 2014 B2
8666725 Och Mar 2014 B2
8676563 Soricut et al. Mar 2014 B2
8688454 Zheng Apr 2014 B2
8694303 Hopkins et al. Apr 2014 B2
8725496 Zhao et al. May 2014 B2
8762128 Brants et al. Jun 2014 B1
8768686 Sarikaya et al. Jul 2014 B2
8775154 Clinchant Jul 2014 B2
8818790 He et al. Aug 2014 B2
8825466 Wang et al. Sep 2014 B1
8831928 Marcu et al. Sep 2014 B2
8843359 Lauder Sep 2014 B2
8862456 Krack et al. Oct 2014 B2
8886515 Van Assche Nov 2014 B2
8886517 Soricut et al. Nov 2014 B2
8886518 Wang et al. Nov 2014 B1
8898052 Waibel Nov 2014 B2
8903707 Zhao Dec 2014 B2
8930176 Li Jan 2015 B2
8935148 Christ Jan 2015 B2
8935149 Zhang Jan 2015 B2
8935150 Christ Jan 2015 B2
8935706 Ellis et al. Jan 2015 B2
8942973 Viswanathan Jan 2015 B2
8943080 Marcu et al. Jan 2015 B2
8972268 Waibel Mar 2015 B2
8977536 Och Mar 2015 B2
8990064 Marcu et al. Mar 2015 B2
9026425 Nikoulina May 2015 B2
9053202 Viswanadha Jun 2015 B2
9081762 Wu et al. Jul 2015 B2
9122674 Wong et al. Sep 2015 B1
9141606 Marciano Sep 2015 B2
9152622 Marcu et al. Oct 2015 B2
9176952 Aikawa Nov 2015 B2
9183192 Ruby, Jr. Nov 2015 B1
9183198 Shen et al. Nov 2015 B2
9197736 Davis et al. Nov 2015 B2
9201870 Jurach Dec 2015 B2
9208144 Abdulnasyrov Dec 2015 B1
9213694 Hieber et al. Dec 2015 B2
9396184 Roy Jul 2016 B2
9465797 Ji Oct 2016 B2
9471563 Trese Oct 2016 B2
9519640 Perez Dec 2016 B2
9552355 Dymetman Jan 2017 B2
9600473 Leydon Mar 2017 B2
9613026 Hodson Apr 2017 B2
10261994 Marcu et al. Apr 2019 B2
10319252 Galley et al. Jun 2019 B2
10402498 Marcu et al. Sep 2019 B2
10417646 Soricut et al. Sep 2019 B2
20010009009 Iizuka Jul 2001 A1
20010029455 Chin et al. Oct 2001 A1
20020002451 Sukehiro Jan 2002 A1
20020013693 Fuji Jan 2002 A1
20020040292 Marcu Apr 2002 A1
20020046018 Marcu et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020046262 Heilig et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020059566 Delcambre et al. May 2002 A1
20020078091 Vu et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020083029 Chun et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020083103 Ballance Jun 2002 A1
20020086268 Shpiro Jul 2002 A1
20020087313 Lee et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020099744 Coden et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020107683 Eisele Aug 2002 A1
20020111788 Kimpara Aug 2002 A1
20020111789 Hull Aug 2002 A1
20020111967 Nagase Aug 2002 A1
20020115044 Shpiro Aug 2002 A1
20020124109 Brown Sep 2002 A1
20020143537 Ozawa et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020152063 Tokieda et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020169592 Aityan Nov 2002 A1
20020188438 Knight et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020188439 Marcu Dec 2002 A1
20020198699 Greene et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020198701 Moore Dec 2002 A1
20020198713 Franz et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030004705 Kempe Jan 2003 A1
20030009320 Furuta Jan 2003 A1
20030009322 Marcu Jan 2003 A1
20030014747 Spehr Jan 2003 A1
20030023423 Yamada et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030040900 D'Agostini Feb 2003 A1
20030061022 Reinders Mar 2003 A1
20030077559 Braunberger et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030129571 Kim Jul 2003 A1
20030144832 Harris Jul 2003 A1
20030154071 Shreve Aug 2003 A1
20030158723 Masuichi et al. Aug 2003 A1
20030176995 Sukehiro Sep 2003 A1
20030182102 Corston-Oliver et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030191626 Al-Onaizan et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030192046 Spehr Oct 2003 A1
20030200094 Gupta Oct 2003 A1
20030204400 Marcu et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030216905 Chelba et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030217052 Rubenczyk et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030233222 Soricut et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040006560 Chan et al. Jan 2004 A1
20040015342 Garst Jan 2004 A1
20040023193 Wen et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040024581 Koehn et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040030551 Marcu et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040034520 Langkilde-Geary Feb 2004 A1
20040044517 Palmquist Mar 2004 A1
20040044530 Moore Mar 2004 A1
20040059708 Dean et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040059730 Zhou Mar 2004 A1
20040068411 Scanlan Apr 2004 A1
20040093327 Anderson et al. May 2004 A1
20040098247 Moore May 2004 A1
20040102956 Levin May 2004 A1
20040102957 Levin May 2004 A1
20040111253 Luo et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040115597 Butt Jun 2004 A1
20040122656 Abir Jun 2004 A1
20040167768 Travieso et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040167784 Travieso et al. Aug 2004 A1
20040176945 Inagaki et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040193401 Ringger et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040230418 Kitamura Nov 2004 A1
20040237044 Travieso et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040255281 Imamura et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040260532 Richardson et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050021322 Richardson et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050021323 Li Jan 2005 A1
20050021517 Marchisio Jan 2005 A1
20050026131 Elzinga et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050033565 Koehn Feb 2005 A1
20050038643 Koehn Feb 2005 A1
20050054444 Okada Mar 2005 A1
20050055199 Ryzchachkin et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050055217 Sumita et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050060160 Roh et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050075858 Pournasseh et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050086226 Krachman Apr 2005 A1
20050102130 Quirk et al. May 2005 A1
20050107999 Kempe et al. May 2005 A1
20050125218 Rajput et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050149315 Flanagan et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050171757 Appleby Aug 2005 A1
20050171944 Palmquist Aug 2005 A1
20050204002 Friend Sep 2005 A1
20050228640 Aue et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050228642 Mau et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050228643 Munteanu et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050234701 Graehl et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050267738 Wilkinson et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060004563 Campbell et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060015320 Och Jan 2006 A1
20060015323 Udupa et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060018541 Chelba et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060020448 Chelba et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060041428 Fritsch et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060095248 Menezes et al. May 2006 A1
20060095526 Levergood et al. May 2006 A1
20060111891 Menezes et al. May 2006 A1
20060111892 Menezes et al. May 2006 A1
20060111896 Menezes et al. May 2006 A1
20060129424 Chan Jun 2006 A1
20060136193 Lux-Pogodalla et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060136824 Lin Jun 2006 A1
20060142995 Knight et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060150069 Chang Jul 2006 A1
20060165040 Rathod et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060167984 Fellenstein et al. Jul 2006 A1
20060190241 Goutte et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060282255 Lu et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070010989 Faruquie et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070015121 Johnson et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070016400 Soricutt et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070016401 Ehsani et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070016918 Alcorn et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070020604 Chulet Jan 2007 A1
20070033001 Muslea et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070043553 Dolan Feb 2007 A1
20070050182 Sneddon et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070060114 Ramer et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070073532 Brockett et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070078654 Moore Apr 2007 A1
20070078845 Scott et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070083357 Moore et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070094169 Yamada et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070112553 Jacobson May 2007 A1
20070112555 Lavi et al. May 2007 A1
20070112556 Lavi et al. May 2007 A1
20070122792 Galley et al. May 2007 A1
20070168202 Changela et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070168450 Prajapat et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070180373 Bauman et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070208719 Tran Sep 2007 A1
20070219774 Quirk et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070233460 Lancaster et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070233547 Younger et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070250306 Marcu et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070265825 Cancedda et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070265826 Chen et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070269775 Andreev et al. Nov 2007 A1
20070294076 Shore et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080040095 Sinha et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080046229 Maskey et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080052061 Kim et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080065478 Kohlmeier et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080065974 Campbell Mar 2008 A1
20080086298 Anismovich Apr 2008 A1
20080109209 Fraser et al. May 2008 A1
20080109374 Levergood et al. May 2008 A1
20080114583 Al-Onaizan et al. May 2008 A1
20080154577 Kim et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080154581 Lavi et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080183555 Walk Jul 2008 A1
20080195461 Li et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080201344 Levergood et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080215418 Kolve et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080243450 Feblowitz et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080249760 Marcu et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080270109 Och Oct 2008 A1
20080270112 Shimohata Oct 2008 A1
20080281578 Kumaran et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080288240 D'Agostini Nov 2008 A1
20080300857 Barbaiani et al. Dec 2008 A1
20080307481 Panje Dec 2008 A1
20090076792 Lawson-Tancred Mar 2009 A1
20090083023 Foster et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090094017 Chen Apr 2009 A1
20090106017 D'Agostini Apr 2009 A1
20090119091 Sarig May 2009 A1
20090125497 Jiang et al. May 2009 A1
20090198487 Wong et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090217196 Neff et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090234634 Chen et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090234635 Bhatt et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090240539 Slawson Sep 2009 A1
20090241115 Raffo et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090248662 Murdock Oct 2009 A1
20090313005 Jaquinta Dec 2009 A1
20090313006 Tang Dec 2009 A1
20090326912 Ueffing Dec 2009 A1
20090326913 Simard et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100005086 Wang et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100017293 Lung et al. Jan 2010 A1
20100042398 Marcu et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100057439 Ideuchi et al. Mar 2010 A1
20100057561 Gifford Mar 2010 A1
20100082326 Bangalore et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100121630 Mende et al. May 2010 A1
20100138210 Seo et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100138213 Bicici et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100158238 Saushkin Jun 2010 A1
20100174524 Koehn Jul 2010 A1
20100179803 Sawaf Jul 2010 A1
20100204978 Gao et al. Aug 2010 A1
20110029300 Marcu et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110066469 Kadosh Mar 2011 A1
20110066643 Cooper Mar 2011 A1
20110082683 Soricut et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110082684 Soricut et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110097693 Crawford Apr 2011 A1
20110184722 Sneddon et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110191096 Sarikaya et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110191410 Refuah et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110202330 Dai et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110225104 Soricut et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110289405 Fritsch et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110307241 Waibel et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120016657 He et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120022852 Tregaskis Jan 2012 A1
20120096019 Manickam et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120116751 Bernardini et al. May 2012 A1
20120136646 Kraenzel et al. May 2012 A1
20120150441 Ma et al. Jun 2012 A1
20120150529 Kim et al. Jun 2012 A1
20120185478 Topham et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120191457 Minnis et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120203776 Nissan Aug 2012 A1
20120232885 Barbosa et al. Sep 2012 A1
20120253783 Castelli et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120265711 Assche Oct 2012 A1
20120278302 Choudhury et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120278356 Furuta et al. Nov 2012 A1
20120323554 Hopkins et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120330990 Chen et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130018650 Moore et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130024184 Vogel et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130103381 Assche Apr 2013 A1
20130124185 Sarr et al. May 2013 A1
20130144594 Bangalore et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130173247 Hodson Jul 2013 A1
20130226563 Hirate Aug 2013 A1
20130226945 Swinson et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130238310 Viswanathan Sep 2013 A1
20130290339 LuVogt et al. Oct 2013 A1
20130325442 Dahlmeier Dec 2013 A1
20140006003 Soricut et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140019114 Travieso et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140058718 Kunchukuttan Feb 2014 A1
20140142917 D'Penha May 2014 A1
20140142918 Dotterer May 2014 A1
20140149102 Marcu et al. May 2014 A1
20140188453 Marcu et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140229257 Reistad et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140297252 Prasad et al. Oct 2014 A1
20140350931 Levit et al. Nov 2014 A1
20140358519 Mirkin Dec 2014 A1
20140358524 Papula Dec 2014 A1
20140365201 Gao Dec 2014 A1
20150051896 Simard et al. Feb 2015 A1
20150106076 Hieber et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150186362 Li Jul 2015 A1
20190042566 Marcu et al. Feb 2019 A1
20190303952 Soricut et al. Oct 2019 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (69)
Number Date Country
5240198 May 1998 AU
694367 Jul 1998 AU
5202299 Oct 1999 AU
2221506 Dec 1996 CA
2408819 Nov 2006 CA
2475857 Dec 2008 CA
2480398 Jun 2011 CA
102193914 Sep 2011 CN
102662935 Sep 2012 CN
102902667 Jan 2013 CN
69525374 Aug 2002 DE
69431306 May 2003 DE
69633564 Nov 2005 DE
202005022113.9 Feb 2014 DE
0469884 Feb 1992 EP
0715265 Jun 1996 EP
0830774 Mar 1998 EP
0933712 Aug 1999 EP
0933712 Jan 2001 EP
1128301 Aug 2001 EP
1128302 Aug 2001 EP
1128303 Aug 2001 EP
0803103 Feb 2002 EP
1235177 Aug 2002 EP
0734556 Sep 2002 EP
1488338 Sep 2004 EP
0830774 Oct 2004 EP
1489523 Dec 2004 EP
1947574 Jul 2008 EP
1488338 Apr 2010 EP
2299369 Mar 2011 EP
2241359 Aug 1991 GB
07244666 Sep 1995 JP
H08101837 Apr 1996 JP
10011447 Jan 1998 JP
H10509543 Sep 1998 JP
H11507752 Jul 1999 JP
11272672 Oct 1999 JP
3190881 Jul 2001 JP
3190882 Jul 2001 JP
3260693 Feb 2002 JP
3367675 Jan 2003 JP
2003157402 May 2003 JP
2004501429 Jan 2004 JP
2004062726 Feb 2004 JP
3762882 Apr 2006 JP
2006216073 Aug 2006 JP
2007042127 Feb 2007 JP
4485548 Jun 2010 JP
4669373 Apr 2011 JP
4669430 Apr 2011 JP
5452868 Jan 2014 JP
WO9516971 Jun 1995 WO
WO9613013 May 1996 WO
WO9642041 Dec 1996 WO
WO9715885 May 1997 WO
WO9819224 May 1998 WO
WO9952626 Oct 1999 WO
WO2002039318 May 2002 WO
WO2003083709 Oct 2003 WO
WO2003083710 Oct 2003 WO
WO2004042615 May 2004 WO
WO2007056563 May 2007 WO
WO2007068123 Jun 2007 WO
WO2010062540 Jun 2010 WO
WO2010062542 Jun 2010 WO
WO-2010062542 Jun 2010 WO
WO2011041675 Apr 2011 WO
WO2011162947 Dec 2011 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (331)
Entry
Shaalan etal., Machine Translation of English Noun Phrases into Arabic:, (2004), vol. 17, No. 2, International Journal of Computer Processing of Oriental Languages, 14 pages (Year: 2004).
Isahara et al., Analysis, Generation and Semantic Representation in CONTRAST—A Context-Based Machine Translation System, 1995, Systems and Computers in Japan, vol. 26, No. 14, pp. 37-53 (Year: 1995).
Shahahbi, Mitra, “An Evaluation of Output Quality of Machine Translation Program”, 2009, Student Research Workshop, RANLP 2009—Borovets, Bulgaria, pp. 71-75 (Year: 2009).
Knight, K. and Al-Onaizan, Y., “A Primer on Finite-State Software for Natural Language Processing”, 1999 (available at http://www.isLedullicensed-sw/carmel).
Knight, K. and Al-Onaizan, Y., “Translation with Finite-State Devices,” Proceedings of the 4th AMTA Conference, 1998.
Knight, K. and Chander, I., “Automated Postediting of Documents,” 1994, Proc. of the 12th Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 779-784.
Knight, K. and Graehl, J., “Machine Transliteration”, 1997, Proc. of the ACL-97, Madrid, Spain, pp. 128-135.
Knight, K. and Hatzivassiloglou, V., “Two-Level, Many-Paths Generation,” 1995, Proc. of the 33rd Annual Conference of the ACL, pp. 252-260.
Knight, K. and Luk, S., “Building a Large-Scale Knowledge Base for Machine Translation,” 1994, Proc. of the 12th Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 773-778.
Knight, K. and Marcu, D., “Statistics-Based Summarization—Step One: Sentence Compression,” 2000, American Association for Artificial Intelligence Conference, pp. 703-710.
Knight, K. and Yamada, K., “A Computational Approach to Deciphering Unknown Scripts,” 1999, Proc. of the ACL Workshop on Unsupervised Learning in Natural Language Processing.
Knight, Kevin, “A Statistical MT Tutorial Workbook,” 1999, JHU Summer Workshop (available at http://www.isLedu/natural-language/mUwkbk.rtf).
Knight, Kevin, “Automating Knowledge Acquisition for Machine Translation,” 1997, AI Magazine, vol. 18, No. 4.
Knight, Kevin, “Connectionist Ideas and Algorithms,” Nov. 1990, Communications of the ACM, vol. 33, No. 11, pp. 59-74.
Knight, Kevin, “Decoding Complexity in Word-Replacement Translation Models”, 1999, Computational Linguistics, vol. 25, No. 4.
Knight, Kevin, “Integrating Knowledge Acquisition and Language Acquisition”, May 1992, Journal of Applied Intelligence, vol. 1, No. 4.
Knight, Kevin, “Learning Word Meanings by Instruction,” 1996, Proc. of the D National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1, pp. 447-454.
Knight, Kevin, “Unification: A Multidisciplinary Survey,” 1989, ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 21, No. 1.
Koehn, Philipp, “Noun Phrase Translation,” A PhD Dissertation for the University of Southern California, pp. i-105, Dec. 2003.
Koehn, P. and Knight, K., “ChunkMT: Statistical Machine Translation with Richer Linguistic Knowledge,” Apr. 2002, Information Sciences Institution.
Koehn, P. and Knight, K., “Estimating Word Translation Probabilities from Unrelated Monolingual Corpora Using the EM Algorithm,” 2000, Proc. of the 17th meeting of the AAAI.
Koehn, P. and Knight, K., “Knowledge Sources for Word-Level Translation Models,” 2001, Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.
Kumar, R. and Li, H., “Integer Programming Approach to Printed Circuit Board Assembly Time Optimization,” 1995, IEEE Transactions on Components, Packaging, and Manufacturing, Part B: Advance Packaging, vol. 18, No. 4. pp. 720-727.
Kupiec, Julian, “An Algorithm for Finding Noun Phrase Correspondences in Bilingual Corpora,” In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the ACL, 1993, pp. 17-22.
Kurohashi, S. and Nagao, M., “Automatic Detection of Discourse Structure by Checking Surface Information in Sentences,” 1994, Proc. of COL-LING '94, vol. 2, pp. 1123-1127.
Langkilde, I. and Knight, K., “Generation that Exploits Corpus-Based Statistical Knowledge,” 1998, Proc. of the COLING-ACL, pp. 704-710.
Langkilde, I. and Knight, K., “The Practical Value of N-Grams in Generation,” 1998, Proc. of the 9th International Natural Language Generation Workshop, pp. 248-255.
Langkilde, Irene, “Forest-Based Statistical Sentence Generation,” 2000, Proc. of the 1st Conference on North American chapter of the ACL, Seattle, WA, pp. 170-177.
Langkilde-Geary, Irene, “A Foundation for General-Purpose Natural Language Generation: Sentence Realization Using Probabilistic Models of Language,” 2002, Ph.D. Thesis, Faculty of the Graduate School, University of Southern California.
Langkilde-Geary, Irene, “An Empirical Verification of Coverage and Correctness for a General-Purpose Sentence Generator,” 1998, Proc. 2nd Int'l Natural Language Generation Conference.
Lee, Yue-Shi, “Neural Network Approach to Adaptive Learning: with an Application to Chinese Homophone Disambiguation,” IEEE 2001 pp. 1521-1526. Jul. 2001.
Lita, L., et al., “tRuEcasIng,” 2003 Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Assoc. for Computational Linguistics (In Hinrichs, E. and Roth, D.—editors), pp. 152-159. Jul. 2003.
Llitjos, A. F. et al., “The Translation Correction Tool: English-Spanish User Studies,” Citeseer © 2004, downloaded from: http://gs37.sp.cs.cmu.edu/ari/papers/lrec04/fontll, pp. 1-4.
Mann, G. and Yarowsky, D., “Multipath Translation Lexicon Induction via Bridge Languages,” 2001, Proc. of the 2nd Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 151-158.
Manning, C. and Schutze, H., “Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing,” 2000, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA [Front Matter].
Marcu, D. and Wong, W., “A Phrase-Based, Joint Probability Model for Statistical Machine Translation,” 2002, Proc. of ACL-2 conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, vol. 10, pp. 133-139.
Marcu, Daniel, “Building Up Rhetorical Structure Trees,” 1996, Proc. of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, vol. 2, pp. 1069-1074.
Marcu, Daniel, “Discourse trees are good indicators of importance in text,” 1999, Advances in Automatic Text Summarization, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Marcu, Daniel, “Instructions for Manually Annotating the Discourse Structures of Texts,” 1999, Discourse Annotation, pp. 1-49.
Marcu, Daniel, “The Rhetorical Parsing of Natural Language Texts,” 1997, Proceedings of ACLIEACL '97, pp. 96-103.
Marcu, Daniel, “The Rhetorical Parsing, Summarization, and Generation of Natural Language Texts,” 1997, Ph.D. Thesis, Graduate Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto.
Marcu, Daniel, “Towards a Unified Approach to Memory- and Statistical-Based Machine Translation,” 2001, Proc. of the 39th Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 378-385.
McCallum, A. and Li, W., “Early Results for Named Entity Recognition with Conditional Random Fields, Feature Induction and Web-enhanced Lexicons,” In Proceedings of the Seventh Conference on Natural Language Learning at HLT-NAACL, 2003, vol. 4 (Edmonton, Canada), Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, pp. 188-191.
McDevitt, K. et al., “Designing of a Community-based Translation Center,” Technical Report TR-03-30, Computer Science, Virginia Tech, © 2003, pp. 1-8.
Melamed, I. Dan, “A Word-to-Word Model of Translational Equivalence,” 1997, Proc. of the 35th Annual Meeting of the ACL, Madrid, Spain, pp. 490-497.
Melamed, I. Dan, “Automatic Evaluation and Uniform Filter Cascades for Inducing N-Best Translation Lexicons,” 1995, Proc. of the 3rd Workshop on Very Large Corpora, Boston, MA, pp. 184-198.
Melamed, I. Dan, “Empirical Methods for Exploiting Parallel Texts,” 2001, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA [table of contents].
Meng et al.. “Generating Phonetic Cognates to Handle Named Entities in English-Chinese Cross-Language Spoken Document Retrieval,” 2001, IEEE Workshop on Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding. pp. 311-314.
Metze, F. et al., “The NESPOLE! Speech-to-Speech Translation System,” Proc. of the HLT 2002, 2nd Int'l. Conf. on Human Language Technology (San Francisco, CA), © 2002, pp. 378-383.
Mikheev et al., “Named Entity Recognition without Gazeteers,” 1999, Proc. of European Chapter of the ACL, Bergen, Norway, pp. 1-8.
Miike et al., “A Full-Text Retrieval System with a Dynamic Abstract Generation Function,” 1994, Proceedings of SI-GIR '94, pp. 152-161.
Mohri, M. and Riley, M., “An Efficient Algorithm for the N-Best-Strings Problem,” 2002, Proc. of the 7th Int. Conf. on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP'02), Denver, CO, pp. 1313-1316.
Mohri, Mehryar, “Regular Approximation of Context Free Grammars Through Transformation”, 2000, pp. 251-261, “Robustness in Language and Speech Technology”, Chapter 9, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Nepveu et al. “Adaptive Language and Translation Models for Interactive Machine Translation” Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Jul. 25, 2004, 8 pages. Retrieved from: http://www.cs.jhu.edu/˜yarowsky/sigdat.html.
Ortiz-Martinez et al. “Online Learning for Interactive Statistical Machine Translation” Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL, Jun. 10, 2010, pp. 546-554. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220817231_Online_Learning_for_Interactive_Statistical_Machine_Translation.
Callison-Burch et al. “Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation” [W12-3100] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 10-51. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Lopez, Adam. “Putting Human Assessments of Machine Translation Systems in Order” [W12-3101] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 1-9. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Avramidis, Eleftherios. “Quality estimation for Machine Translation output using linguistic analysis and decoding features” [W12-3108] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 84-90. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Buck, Christian. “Black Box Features for the WMT 2012 Quality Estimation Shared Task” [W12-3109] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 91-95. Retrieved from: Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Felice et al. “Linguistic Features for Quality Estimation” [W12-3110] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 96-103. Retrieved at: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Gonzalez-Rubio et al. “PRHLT Submission to the WMT12 Quality Estimation Task” [W12-3111] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 104-108. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Hardmeier et al. “Tree Kernels for Machine Translation Quality Estimation” [W12-3112] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation,Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 109-113. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Langlois et al. “LORIA System for the WMT12 Quality Estimation Shared Task” [W12-3113] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 114-119. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Moreau et al. “Quality Estimation: an experimental study using unsupervised similarity measures” [W12-3114] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 120-126. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Gonzalez et al. “The UPC Submission to the WMT 2012 Shared Task on Quality Estimation” [W12-3115] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 127-132. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Popovic, Maja. “Morpheme- and POS-based IBM1 and language model scores for translation quality estimation” Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 133-137. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Rubino et al. “DCU-Symantec Submission for the WMT 2012 Quality Estimation Task” [W12-3117] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 138-144. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Soricut et al. “The SDL Language Weaver Systems in the WMT12 Quality Estimation Shared Task” [W12-3118] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 145-151. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Wu et al. “Regression with Phrase Indicators for Estimating MT Quality” [W12-3119] Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jun. 7, 2012, pp. 152-156. Retrieved from: http://aclanthology.info/volumes/proceedings-of-the-seventh-workshop-onstatistical-machine-translation.
Wuebker et al. “Hierarchical Incremental Adaptation for Statistical Machine Translation” Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 1059-1065, Lisbon, Portugal, Sep. 17-21, 2015.
“Best Practices—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Mar. 6, 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 19, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/translators/best-practices>, 2 pages.
“Data Security—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Oct. 14, 2016 [retrieved on Oct. 19, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/security>, 1 pages.
“Data Security and Confidentiality,” Lilt website [online], 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 19, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/security>, 7 pages.
“Memories—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Jun. 7, 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 19, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/project-managers/memory>, 4 pages.
“Memories (API)—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Jun. 2, 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 19, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/api/memories>, 1 page.
“Quoting—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Jun. 7, 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 19, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/project-managers/quoting>, 4 pages.
“The Editor—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Aug. 15, 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 19, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/translators/editor>, 5 pages.
“Training Lilt—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Oct. 14, 2016 [retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/troubleshooting/training-lilt>, 1 page.
“What is Lilt_—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online],Dec. 15, 2016 [retrieved on Oct. 19, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/what-is-lilt>, 1 page.
“Getting Started—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Apr. 11, 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/translators/getting-started>, 2 pages.
“The Lexicon—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Jun. 7, 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/translators/lexicon>, 4 pages.
“Simple Translation—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Aug. 17, 2017 [retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/api/simple-translation>, 3 pages.
“Split and Merge—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Oct. 14, 2016 [retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017], Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/translators/split-merge>, 4 pages.
“Lilt API _ API Reference,” Lilt website [online], retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017, Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/docs/api>, 53 pages.
“Automatic Translation Quality—Knowledge Base”, Lilt website [online], Dec. 1, 2016, retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017, Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/evaluation/evaluate-mt>, 4 pages.
“Projects—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Jun. 7, 2017, retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017, Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/project-managers/projects>, 3 pages.
“Getting Started with lilt.js—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], May 30, 2017, retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017, Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/api/lilt-js>, 6 pages.
“Interactive Translation—Knowledge Base,” Lilt website [online], Aug. 17, 2017, retrieved on Oct. 20, 2017, Retrieved from the Internet:<https://lilt.com/kb/api/interactive-translation>, 2 pages.
Ueffing et al., “Using POS Information for Statistical Machine Translation into Morphologically Rich Languages,” In EACL, 2003: Proceedings of the Tenth Conference on European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 347-354.
Frederking et al., “Three Heads are Better Than One,” In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, Stuttgart, Germany, 1994, pp. 95-100.
Yasuda et al., “Automatic Machine Translation Selection Scheme to Output the Best Result,” Proc. of LREC, 2002, pp. 525-528.
Huang et al., “A syntax-directed translator with extended domain of locality,” Jun. 9, 2006, In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computationally Hard Problems and Joint Inference in Speech and Language Processing, pp. 1-8, New York City, New York, Association for Computational Linguistics.
Melamed et al., “Statistical machine translation by generalized parsing,” 2005, Technical Report 05-001, Proteus Project, New York University, http://nlp.cs.nyu.edu/pubs/.
Huang et al., “Statistical syntax-directed translation with extended domain of locality,” Jun. 9, 2006, In Proceedings of AMTA, pp. 1-8.
“Office Action,” German Application No. 112005002534.9, dated Feb. 7, 2018, 6 pages (9 pages including translation).
Papineni et al., “Bleu: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation”, Proc. of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Jul. 2002, pp. 311-318.
Shaalan et al., “Machine Translation of English Noun Phrases into Arabic”, (2004), vol. 17, No. 2, International Journal of Computer Processing of Oriental Languages, 14 pages.
Isahara et al., “Analysis, Generation and Semantic Representation in CONTRAST—A Context-Based Machine Translation System”, 1995, Systems and Computers in Japan, vol. 26, No. 14, pp. 37-53.
Graehl, J and Knight, K, May 2004, “Training Tree Transducers,” in NAACL-HLT (2004), pp. 105-112.
Niessen et al, “Statistical machine translation with scarce resources using morphosyntactic information”, Jun. 2004, Computational Linguistics, vol. 30, issue 2, pp. 181-204.
Liu et al., “Context Discovery Using Attenuated Bloom Filters in Ad-Hoc Networks,” Springer, pp. 13-25, 2006.
First Office Action dated Jun. 7, 2004 in Canadian Patent Application 2408819, filed May 11, 2001.
First Office Action dated Jun. 14, 2007 in Canadian Patent Application 2475857, filed Mar. 11, 2003.
Carl, M. “A Constructivist Approach to Machine Translation,” 1998, New Methods of Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning, pp. 247-256.
Chen, et al., “Machine Translation: An Integrated Approach,” 1995, Proc. of 6th Int'l Cont. on Theoretical and Methodological Issue in MT, pp. 287-294.
Cheng et al., “Creating Multilingual Translation Lexicons with Regional Variations Using Web Corpora,” In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting on Assoc. for Computational Linguistics (Barcelona, Spain, Jul. 21-26, 2004). Annual Meeting of the ACL. Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, 53.
Cheung et al., “Sentence Alignment in Parallel, Comparable, and Quasi-comparable Corpora”, In Proceedings of LREC, 2004, pp. 30-33.
Chinchor, Nancy, “MUC-7 Named Entity Task Definition,” 1997, Version 3.5.
Clarkson, P. and Rosenfeld, R., “Statistical Language Modeling Using the CMU-Cambridge Toolkit”, 1997, Proc. ESCA Eurospeech, Rhodes, Greece, pp. 2707-2710.
Cohen et al., “Spectral Bloom Filters,” SIGMOD 2003, Jun. 9-12, 2003, ACM pp. 241-252.
Cohen, “Hardware-Assisted Algorithm for Full-text Large-Dictionary String Matching Using n-gram Hashing,” 1998, Information Processing and Management, vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 443-464.
Yossi, Cohen “Interpreter for FUF,” available at URL <ftp://ftp.cs.bgu.ac.il/pub/people/elhadad/fuf-life.lf> (downloaded Jun. 1, 2008).
Corston-Oliver, S., “Beyond String Matching and Cue Phrases: Improving Efficiency and Coverage in Discourse Analysis”, 1998, The AAAI Spring Symposium on Intelligent Text Summarization, pp. 9-15.
Covington, “An Algorithm to Align Words for Historical Comparison”, Computational Linguistics, 1996,vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 481-496.
Dagan et al., “Word Sense Disambiguation Using a Second Language Monolingual Corpus”, 1994, Association for Computational Linguistics, vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 563-596.
Dempster et al., “Maximum Likelihood from Incomplete Data via the EM Algorithm”, 1977, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, vol. 39, No. 1, pp. 1-38.
Diab et al., “A Statistical Word-Level Translation Model for Comparable Corpora,” 2000, In Proc. of the Conference on Content Based Multimedia Information Access (RIAO).
Diab, M., “An Unsupervised Method for Multilingual Word Sense Tagging Using Parallel Corpora: A Preliminary Investigation”, 2000, SIGLEX Workshop on Word Senses and Multi-Linguality, pp. 1-9.
Eisner, Jason, “Learning Non-Isomorphic Tree Mappings for Machine Translation,” 2003, in Proc. of the 41st Meeting of the ACL, pp. 205-208.
Elhadad et al., “Floating Constraints in Lexical Choice”, 1996, ACL, vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 195-239.
Elhadad, M. and Robin, J., “An Overview of SURGE: a Reusable Comprehensive Syntactic Realization Component,” 1996, Technical Report 96-03, Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel.
Elhadad, M. and Robin, J., “Controlling Content Realization with Functional Unification Grammars”, 1992, Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation, Dale et al. (eds)., Springer Verlag, pp. 89-104.
Elhadad, Michael, “FUF: the Universal Unifier User Manual Version 5.2”, 1993, Department of Computer Science, Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel.
Elhadad, Michael, “Using Argumentation to Control Lexical Choice: A Functional Unification Implementation”, 1992, Ph.D. Thesis, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Columbia University.
Elhadad, M. and Robin, J., “SURGE: a Comprehensive Plug-in Syntactic Realization Component for Text Generation”, 1999 (available at http://www.cs.bgu.ac.il/-elhadad/pub.html).
Fleming, Michael et al., “Mixed-Initiative Translation of Web Pages,” AMTA 2000, LNAI 1934, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2000, pp. 25-29.
Och, Franz Josef and Ney, Hermann, “Improved Statistical Alignment Models” ACLOO:Proc. of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ′Online! Oct. 2-6, 2000, pp. 440-447, XP002279144 Hong Kong, China Retrieved from the Internet: <URL:http://www-i6.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Colleagues/och/ACLOO.ps>, retrieved on May 6, 2004, abstract.
Ren, Fuji and Shi, Hongchi, “Parallel Machine Translation: Principles and Practice,” Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, 2001 Proceedings, Seventh IEEE Int'l. Conference, pp. 249-259, 2001.
Fung et al, “Mining Very-Non-Parallel Corpora: Parallel Sentence and Lexicon Extraction via Bootstrapping and EM”, In EMNLP 2004.
Fung, P. and Yee, L., “An IR Approach for Translating New Words from Nonparallel, Comparable Texts”, 1998, 36th Annual Meeting of the ACL, 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 414-420.
Fung, Pascale, “Compiling Bilingual Lexicon Entries From a Non-Parallel English-Chinese Corpus”, 1995, Proc., of the Third Workshop on Very Large Corpora, Boston, MA, pp. 173-183.
Gale, W. and Church, K., “A Program for Aligning Sentences in Bilingual Corpora,” 1991, 29th Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 177-183.
Galley et al., “Scalable Inference and Training of Context-Rich Syntactic Translation Models,” Jul. 2006, in Proc. of the 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 961-968.
Galley et al., “What's in a translation rule?”, 2004, in Proc. of HLT/NAACL '04, pp. 1-8.
Gaussier et al, “A Geometric View on Bilingual Lexicon Extraction from Comparable Corpora”, In Proceedings of ACL Jul. 2004.
Germann et al., “Fast Decoding and Optimal Decoding for Machine Translation”, 2001, Proc. of the 39th Annual Meeting of the ACL, Toulouse, France, pp. 228-235.
Germann, Ulrich: “Building a Statistical Machine Translation System from Scratch: How Much Bang for the Buck Can We Expect?” Proc. of the Data-Driven MT Workshop of ACL-01, Toulouse, France, 2001.
Gildea, D., “Loosely Tree-based Alignment for Machine Translation,” In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting on Assoc. for Computational Linguistics—vol. 1 (Sapporo, Japan, Jul. 7-12, 2003). Annual Meeting of the ACL Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, 80-87. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/1075096.1075107.
Grefenstette, Gregory, “The World Wide Web as a Resource for Example-Based Machine Translation Tasks”, 1999, Translating and the Computer 21, Proc. of the 21 st International Conf. on Translating and the Computer. London, UK, 12 pp.
Grossi et al, “Suffix Trees and Their Applications in String Algorithms”, In. Proceedings of the 1st South American Workshop on String Processing, Sep. 1993, pp. 57-76.
Gupta et al., “Kelips: Building an Efficient and Stable P2P DHT thorough Increased Memory and Background Overhead,” 2003 IPTPS, LNCS 2735, pp. 160-169.
Habash, Nizar, “The Use of a Structural N-gram Language Model in Generation-Heavy Hybrid Machine Translation,” University of Maryland, Univ. Institute for Advance Computer Studies, Sep. 8, 2004.
Hatzivassiloglou, V. et al., “Unification-Based Glossing”, 1995, Proc. of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1382-1389.
Huang et al., “Relabeling Syntax Trees to Improve Syntax-Based Machine Translation Quality,” Jun. 4-9, 2006, in Proc. of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL, pp. 240-247.
Ide, N. and Veronis, J., “Introduction to the Special Issue on Word Sense Disambiguation: The State of the Art”, Mar. 1998, Computational Linguistics, vol. 24, Issue 1, pp. 2-40.
Bikel, D., Schwartz, R., and Weischedei, R., “An Algorithm that Learns What's in a Name,” Machine Learning 34, 211-231 (1999).
Imamura et al., “Feedback Cleaning of Machine Translation Rules Using Automatic Evaluation,” 2003 Computational Linguistics, pp. 447-454.
Imamura, Kenji, “Hierarchical Phrase Alignment Harmonized with Parsing”, 2001, in Proc. of NLPRS, Tokyo.
Jelinek, F., “Fast Sequential Decoding Algorithm Using a Stack”, Nov. 1969, IBM J. Res. Develop., vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 675-685.
Jones, K. Sparck, “Experiments in Relevance Weighting of Search Terms”, 1979, Information Processing & Management, vol. 15, Pergamon Press Ltd., UK, pp. 133-144.
Klein et al., “Accurate Unlexicalized Parsing,” Jul. 2003, in Proc. of the 41st Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 423-430.
Knight et al., “Integrating Knowledge Bases and Statistics in MT,” 1994, Proc. of the Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas.
Knight et al., “Filling Knowledge Gaps in a Broad-Coverage Machine Translation System”, 1995, Proc. of the14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Montreal, Canada, vol. 2, pp. 1390-1396.
Varga et al., “Parallel Corpora for Medium Density Languages”, In Proceedings of RANLP 2005, pp. 590-596.
Veale, T. and Way, A., “Gaijin: A Bootstrapping, Template-Driven Approach to Example-Based MT,” 1997, Proc. of New Methods in Natural Language Processing (NEMPLP97), Sofia, Bulgaria.
Vogel et al., “The CMU Statistical Machine Translation System,” 2003, Machine Translation Summit IX, New Orleans, LA.
Vogel et al., “The Statistical Translation Module in the Verbmobil System,” 2000, Workshop on Multi-Lingual Speech Communication, pp. 69-74.
Vogel, S. and Ney, H., “Construction of a Hierarchical Translation Memory,” 2000, Proc. of Cooling 2000, Saarbrucken, Germany, pp. 1131-1135.
Wang, Y. and Waibel, A., “Decoding Algorithm in Statistical Machine Translation,” 1996, Proc. of the 35th Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 366-372.
Wang, Ye-Yi, “Grammar Inference and Statistical Machine Translation,” 1998, Ph.D Thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Watanabe et al., “Statistical Machine Translation Based on Hierarchical Phrase Alignment,” 2002, 9th International Conference on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Machine Translation (TMI-2002), Keihanna, Japan, pp. 188-198.
Witbrock, M. and Mittal, V., “Ultra-Summarization: A Statistical Approach to Generating Highly Condensed Non-Extractive Summaries,” 1999, Proc. of SIGIR '99, 22nd International Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Berkeley, CA, pp. 315-316.
Wu, Dekai, “A Polynomial-Time Algorithm for Statistical Machine Translation,” 1996, Proc. of 34th Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 152-158.
Wu, Dekai, “Stochastic Inversion Transduction Grammars and Bilingual Parsing of Parallel Corpora,” 1997, Computational Linguistics, vol. 23, Issue 3, pp. 377-403.
Yamada, K. and Knight, K. “A Syntax-Based Statistical Translation Model,” 2001, Proc. of the 39th Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 523-530.
Yamada, K. and Knight, K., “A Decoder for Syntax-Based Statistical MT,” 2001, Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 303-310.
Yamada K., “A Syntax-Based Statistical Translation Model,” 2002 PhD Dissertation, pp. 1-141.
Yamamoto et al., “A Comparative Study on Translation Units for Bilingual Lexicon Extraction,” 2001, Japan Academic Association for Copyright Clearance, Tokyo, Japan.
Yamamoto et al, “Acquisition of Phrase-level Bilingual Correspondence using Dependency Structure” In Proceedings of COLING-2000, pp. 933-939.
Yarowsky, David, “Unsupervised Word Sense Disambiguation Rivaling Supervised Methods,” 1995, 33rd Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 189-196.
Zhang et al., “Synchronous Binarization for Machine Translations,” Jun. 4-9, 2006, in Proc. of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL, pp. 256-263.
Zhang et al., “Distributed Language Modeling for N-best List Re-ranking,” In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (Sydney, Australia, Jul. 22-23, 2006). ACL Workshops. Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, 216-223.
Patent Cooperation Treaty International Preliminary Report on Patentability and The Written Opinion, International application No. PCT/US2008/004296, dated Oct. 6, 2009, 5 pgs.
Document, Wikipedia.com, web.archive.org (Feb. 22, 2004) /http://en.wikipedia.org/wikii/Document>, Feb. 22, 2004.
Identifying, Dictionary.com, wayback.archive.org (Feb. 28, 2007) </http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/identifying>, accessed Oct. 27, 2011 <http://web.archive.org/web/20070228150533/http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/identifying>.
Koehn, P. et al, “Statistical Phrase-Based Translation,” Proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2003 Main Papers , pp. 48-54 Edmonton, May-Jun. 2003.
Abney, S.P., “Stochastic Attribute Value Grammars”, Association for Computational Linguistics, 1997, pp. 597-618.
Fox, H., “Phrasal Cohesion and Statistical Machine Translation” Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Philadelphia, Jul. 2002, pp. 304-311. Association for Computational Linguistics. <URL: http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/W/W02/W02-1039.pdf>.
Tillman, C., et al, “Word Reordering and a Dynamic Programming Beam Search Algorithm for Statistical Machine Translation,” 2003, Association for Computational Linguistics, vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 97-133 <URL: http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/J/J03/J03-1005.pdf>.
Wang, W., et al. “Capitalizing Machine Translation” In HLT-NAACL '06 Proceedings Jun. 2006. <http://www.isi.edu/natural-language/mt/hlt-naacl-06-wang.pdf>.
Langlais, P. et al., “TransType: a Computer-Aided Translation Typing System” EmbedMT '00 ANLP-NAACL 2000 Workshop: Embedded Machine Translation Systems, 2000, pp. 46-51. <http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/W/W00/W00-0507.pdf>.
Dreyer, Markus et al., “HyTER: Meaning-Equivalent Semantics for Translation Evaluation,” in Proceedings of the 2012 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association of Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies. Jun. 3, 2012. 10 pages.
Przybocki, M.; Peterson, K.; Bronsart, S.; Official results of the NIST 2008 “Metrics for MAchine TRanslation” Challenge (MetricsMATR08), 7 pages. http://nist.gov/speech/tests/metricsmatr/2008/results/; https://www.nist.gov/multimodal-information-group/metrics-machine-translation-evaluation#history; https://www.nist.gov/itl/iad/mig/metrics-machine-translation-2010-evaluation.
Bangalore, S. and Rambow, O., “Using TAGs, a Tree Model, and a Language Model for Generation,” May 2000, Workshop TAG+5, Paris.
Gale, W. and Church, K., “A Program for Aligning Sentences in Bilingual Corpora,” 1993, Computational Linguistics, vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 75-102.
Leusch et al.. , “A Novel String-to-String Distance Measure with Applications to Machine Translation Evaluation”, 2003, https://www-i6.informatik.rwth-aachen.de, pp. 1-8.
Oflazer, Kemal., “Error-tolerant Finite-state Recognition with Application to Morphological Analysis and Spelling Correction”, 1996, https://www.ucrel.lancs.ac.uk, pp. 1-18.
Snover et al., “A Study of Translation Edit Rate with Targeted Human Annotation”, In Proceedings of the Association for Machine Translation n the Americas, pp. 223-231, 2006, available at https://www.cs.umd.edu/˜snover/pub/amta06/ter_amta.pdf.
Levenshtein, V.I., “Binary Codes Capable of Correcting Deletions, Insertions, and Reversals”, 1966, Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR, vol. 163, No. 4, pp. 707-710.
Hildebrand et al., “Adaptation of the Translation Model for Statistical Machine Translation based on Information Retrieval,” EAMT 2005 Conference Proceedings (May 2005), pp. 133-142 (10 pages).
Och et al., “The Alignment Template Approach to Statitstical Machine Translation,” Journal Computational Linguistics, vol. 30, Issue 4, Dec. 2004, pp. 417-449 (39 pages).
Sethy et al, “Buidling Topic Specific Language Models from Webdata Using Competitive Models,” INTERSPEECH 2005—Eurospeech, 9th European Conference on Speech Communication and Technology, Lisbon, Portugal, Sep. 4-8, 2005. 4 pages.
Potet et al., “Preliminary Experiments on Using Users; Post-Edititions to Enhance a SMT System,” Proceedings of the15th Conference of the European Association for Machine Translation, May 2011, pp. 161-168.
Ortiz-Martinez et al., “An Interactive Machine Translation System with Online Learning,” Proceedings of the ACL-HLT 2011 System Demonstrations, Jun. 21, 2011, pp. 68-73.
Lopez-Salcedo et al., “Online Learning of Log-Linear Weights in Interactive Machine Translation,” Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 328, 2012. 10 pages.
Blanchon et al., “A Web Service Enabling Gradable Post-edition of Pre-translations Produced by Existing Translation Tools: Practical Use to Provide High Quality Translation of an Online Encyclopedia,” Jan. 2009. 8 pages.
Levenberg et al., “Stream-based Translation Models for Statistical Machine Translation,” Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL, Jun. 2010, pp. 394-402.
Lagarda et al., “Statistical Post-Editing of a Rule-Based Machine Translation System,” Proceedings of NAACL HLT 2009, Jun. 2009, pp. 217-220.
Ehara, “Rule Based Machine Translation Combined with Statistical Post Editor for Japanese to English Patent Translation,” MT Summit XI, 2007, pp. 13-18.
Bechara et al., “Statistical Post-Editing for a Statistical MT System,” Proceedings of the 13th Machine Translation Summit, 2011, pp. 308-315.
Dobrinkat, “Domain Adaptation in Statistical Machine Translation Systems via User Feedback,” Abstract of Master's Thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Nov. 25, 2008, 103 pages.
Business Wire, “Language Weaver Introduces User-Managed Customization Tool,” Oct. 25, 2005, 3 pages. http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20051025005443/en/Language-Weaver-Introduces-User-Managed-Customization-Tool-Newest.
Winiwarter, “Learning Transfer Rules for Machine Translation from Parallel Corpora,” Journal of Digital Information Management, vol. 6, No. 4, Aug. 1, 2008, pp. 285-293 (9 pages).
Office Action dated Mar. 26, 2012 in German Patent Application 10392450.7, filed Mar. 28, 2003.
First Office Action dated Nov. 5, 2008 in Canadian Patent Application 2408398, filed Mar. 27, 2003.
Second Office Action dated Sep. 25, 2009 in Canadian Patent Application 2408398, filed Mar. 27, 2003.
First Office Action dated Mar. 1, 2005 in European Patent Application No. 03716920.8, filed Mar. 27, 2003.
Second Office Action dated Nov. 9, 2006 in European Patent Application No. 03716920.8, filed Mar. 27, 2003.
Third Office Action dated Apr. 30, 2008 in European Patent Application No. 03716920.8, filed Mar. 27, 2003.
Office Action dated Oct. 25, 2011 in Japanese Patent Application 2007-536911 filed Oct. 12, 2005.
Office Action dated Jul. 24, 2012 in Japanese Patent Application 2007-536911 filed Oct. 12, 2005.
Final Office Action dated Apr. 9, 2013 in Japanese Patent Application 2007-536911 filed Oct. 12, 2005.
Office Action dated May 13, 2005 in Chinese Patent Application 1812317.1, filed May 11, 2001.
Office Action dated Apr. 21, 2006 in Chinese Patent Application 1812317.1, filed May 11, 2001.
Office Action dated Jul. 19, 2006 in Japanese Patent Application 2003-577155, filed Mar. 11, 2003.
Office Action dated Mar. 1, 2007 in Chinese Patent Application 3805749.2, filed Mar. 11, 2003.
Office Action dated Feb. 27, 2007 in Japanese Patent Application 2002-590018, filed May 13, 2002.
Office Action dated Jan. 26, 2007 in Chinese Patent Application 3807018.9, filed Mar. 27, 2003.
Office Action dated Dec. 7, 2005 in Indian Patent Application 2283/DELNP/2004, filed Mar. 11, 2003.
Office Action dated Mar. 31, 2009 in European Patent Application 3714080.3, filed Mar. 11, 2003.
Agichtein et al., “Snowball: Extracting Information from Large Plain-Text Collections,” ACM DL '00, the Fifth ACM Conference on Digital Libraries, Jun. 2, 2000, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Satake, Masaomi, “Anaphora Resolution for Named Entity Extraction in Japanese Newspaper Articles,” Master's Thesis [online], Feb. 15, 2002, School of Information Science, JAIST, Nomi, Ishikaw, Japan.
Office Action dated Aug. 29, 2006 in Japanese Patent Application 2003-581064, filed Mar. 27, 2003.
Office Action dated Jan. 26, 2007 in Chinese Patent Application 3807027.8, filed Mar. 28, 2003.
Office Action dated Jul. 25, 2006 in Japanese Patent Application 2003-581063, filed Mar. 28, 2003.
Proz.com, Rates for proofreading versus Translating, http://www.proz.com/forum/business_issues/202-rates_for_proofreading_versus_translating.html, Apr. 23, 2009, retrieved Jul. 13, 2012.
Graciet C., Volume discounts on large translation project, naked translations, http://www.nakedtranslations.com/en/2007/volume-discounts-on-large-translation-projects/, Aug. 1, 2007, retrieved Jul. 16, 2012.
Editorial FreeLancer Association, Guidelines for Fees, https://web.archive.org/web/20090604130631/http://www.the-efa.org/res/code_2.php, Jun. 4, 2009, retrieved Aug. 9, 2014.
Wasnak, L., “Beyond the Basics: How Much Should I Charge”, https://web.archive.org/web/20070121231531/http://www.writersmarket.com/assets/pdf/How_Much_Should_I_Charge.pdf, Jan. 21, 2007, retrieved Aug. 19, 2014.
Huang et al. “Automatic Extraction of Named Entity Translingual Equivalence Based on Multi-Feature Cost Minimization”. In Proceedings of the ACL 2003 Workshop on Multilingual and Mixed-Language Name Entry Recognition.
Notice of Allowance dated Dec. 10, 2013 in Japanese Patent Application 2007-536911, filed Oct. 12, 2005.
Makoushina, J. “Translation Quality Assurance Tools: Current State and Future Approaches.” Translating and the Computer, Dec. 17, 2007, 29, 1-39, retrieved at <http://www.palex.ru/fc/98/Translation%20Quality%Assurance%20Tools.pdf>.
Specia et al. “Improving the Confidence of Machine Translation Quality Estimates,” MT Summit XII, Ottawa, Canada, 2009, 8 pages.
Soricut et al., “TrustRank: Inducing Trust in Automatic Translations via Ranking”, published in Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Jul. 2010, pp. 612-621.
Marcu, D., “System and Method for Language Translation and Online Advertisement Generation,” U.S. Appl. No. 11/454,212, filed Jun. 15, 2006, Specification, Claims, Abstract, and Drawings, 32 pages.
Summons to Attend Oral Proceedings mailed Sep. 18, 2014 in German Patent Application 10392450.7, filed Mar. 28, 2003.
Examination Report dated Jul. 22, 2013 in German Patent Application 112005002534.9, filed Oct. 12, 2005.
Gao et al., Proceedings of the Joint Fifth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation and Metrics (MATR), 2010, pp. 1-10 and 121-126.
Callison-Burch et al., “Findings of the 2011 Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation,” In Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Edinburgh, Scotland, July. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2011, pp. 22-64.
Bojar et al., “A Grain of Salt for the WMT Manual Evaluation,” In Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Edinburgh, Scotland, Association for Computational Linguistics, Jul. 2011, pp. 1-11.
Przybocki et al., “GALE Machine Translation Metrology: Definition, Implementation, and Calculation,” Chapter 5.4 in Handbook of Natural Language Processing and Machine Translation, Olive et al., eds., Springer, 2011, pp. 783-811.
Snover et al., “Fluency, Adequacy, or HTER? Exploring Different Human Judgements with a Tunable MT Metric”, In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation at the 12th Meeting of the EACL, pp. 259-268, 2009.
Cormode et al., “The String Edit Distance Matching Problem with Moves,” in ACM Transactions on Algorithms (TALG), 3(1):1-19, 2007.
Kanthak et al., “Novel Reordering Approaches in Phrase-Based Statistical Machine Translation,” In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Building and Using Parallel Texts, Jun. 2005, pp. 167-174.
Allauzen et al., “OpenFst: A General and Efficient Weighted Finitestate Transducer Library,” In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Implementation and Application of Automata (CIAA), 2007, pp. 11-23.
Denkowski et al., “Meteor 1.3: Automatic Metric for Reliable Optimization and Evaluation of Machine Translation Systems,” In Proceedings of the EMNLP 2011 Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation, Jul. 2011, pp. 85-91.
Lavie et al., “The Meteor Metric for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation,” Machine Translation, Sep. 2009, 23: 105-115.
Crammer et al., “On the Algorithmic Implementation of Multi-Class Kernel-based Vector Machines,” In Journal of Machine Learning Research 2, Dec. 2001, pp. 265-292.
Kumar, Shankar, “Minimum Bayes-Risk Techniques in Automatic Speech Recognition and Statistical Machine Translation: A dissertation submitted to the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy,” Baltimore, MD Oct. 2004.
Office Action dated Feb. 2, 2015 in German Patent Application 10392450.7, filed Mar. 28, 2003.
Abney, Steven P. , “Parsing by Chunks,” 1991, Principle-Based Parsing: Computation and Psycholinguistics, vol. 44, pp. 257-279.
Agbago, A., et al., “Truecasing for the Portage System,” In Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (Borovets, Bulgaria), Sep. 21-23, 2005, pp. 21-24.
Al-Onaizan et al., “Statistical Machine Translation,” 1999, JHU Summer Tech Workshop, Final Report, pp. 1-42.
Al-Onaizan et al., “Translating with Scarce Resources,” 2000, 17th National Conference of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence, Austin, TX, pp. 672-678.
Al-Onaizan, Y. and Knight K., “Machine Transliteration of Names in Arabic Text,” Proceedings of ACL Workshop on Computational Approaches to Semitic Languages. Philadelphia, 2002.
Al-Onaizan, Y. and Knight, K., “Named Entity Translation: Extended Abstract”, 2002, Proceedings of HLT-02, San Diego, CA.
Al-Onaizan, Y. and Knight, K., “Translating Named Entities Using Monolingual and Bilingual Resources,” 2002, Proc. of the 40th Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 400-408.
Alshawi et al., “Learning Dependency Translation Models as Collections of Finite-State Head Transducers,” 2000, Computational Linguistics, vol. 26, pp. 45-60.
Alshawi, Hiyan, “Head Automata for Speech Translation”, Proceedings of the ICSLP 96, 1996, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Ambati, V., “Dependency Structure Trees in Syntax Based Machine Translation,” Spring 2008 Report <http://www.cs.cmu.edu/˜vamshi/publications/DependencyMT_report.pdf>, pp. 1-8.
Arbabi et al., “Algorithms for Arabic name transliteration,” Mar. 1994, IBM Journal of Research and Development, vol. 38, Issue 2, pp. 183-194.
Arun, A., et al., “Edinburgh System Description for the 2006 TC-STAR Spoken Language Translation Evaluation,” in TC-STAR Workshop on Speech-to-Speech Translation (Barcelona, Spain), Jun. 2006, pp. 37-41.
Ballesteros, L. et al., “Phrasal Translation and Query Expansion Techniques for Cross-Language Information Retrieval,” SIGIR 97, Philadelphia, PA, © 1997, pp. 84-91.
Bangalore, S. and Rambow, O., “Evaluation Metrics for Generation,” 2000, Proc. of the 1st International Natural Language Generation Conf., vol. 14, pp. 1-8.
Bangalore, S. and Rambow, O., “Corpus-Based Lexical Choice in Natural Language Generation,” 2000, Proc. of the 38th Annual ACL, Hong Kong, pp. 464-471.
Bangalore, S. and Rambow, O., “Exploiting a Probabilistic Hierarchical Model for Generation,” 2000, Proc. of 18th conf. on Computational Linguistics, vol. 1, pp. 42-48.
Bannard, C. and Callison-Burch, C., “Paraphrasing with Bilingual Parallel Corpora,” In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics (Ann Arbor, MI, Jun. 25-30, 2005), Annual Meeting of the ACL Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, 597-604. DOI=http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/1219840.
Barnett et al., “Knowledge and Natural Language Processing,” Aug. 1990, Communications of the ACM, vol. 33, Issue 8, pp. 50-71.
Baum, L., “An Inequality and Associated Maximization Technique in Statistical Estimation for Probabilistic Functions of Markov Processes”, 1972, Inequalities 3:1-8.
Berhe, G. et al., “Modeling Service-based Multimedia Content Adaptation in Pervasive Computing,” CF '04 (Ischia, Italy) Apr. 14-16, 2004, pp. 60-69.
Boitet, C. et al., “Main Research Issues in Building Web Services for Mutualized, Non-Commercial Translation,” Proc. of the 6th Symposium on Natural Language Processing, Human and Computer Processing of Language and Speech, © 2005, pp. 1-11.
Brants, T., “TnT—A Statistical Part-of-Speech Tagger,” 2000, Proc. of the 6th Applied Natural Language Processing Conference, Seattle.
Brill, E., “Transformation-Based Error-Driven Learning and Natural Language Processing: A Case Study in Part of Speech Tagging”, 1995, Computational Linguistics, vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 543-565.
Brown et al., “A Statistical Approach to Machine Translation,” Jun. 1990, Computational Linguistics, vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 79-85.
Brown et al., “Word-Sense Disambiguation Using Statistical Methods,” 1991, Proc. of 29th Annual ACL, pp. 264-270.
Brown et al., “The Mathematics of Statistical Machine Translation: Parameter Estimation,” 1993, Computational Linguistics, vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 263-311.
Brown, Ralf, “Automated Dictionary Extraction for “Knowledge-Free” Example-Based Translation,” 1997, Proc. of 7th Int'l Cont. on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in MT, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 111-118.
Callan et al., “TREC and TIPSTER Experiments with INQUERY,” 1994, Information Processing and Management, vol. 31, Issue 3, pp. 327-343.
Callison-Burch, C. et al., “Statistical Machine Translation with Word- and Sentence-aligned Parallel Corpora,” In Proceedings of the 42nd Meeting on Assoc. for Computational Linguistics (Barcelona, Spain, Jul. 21-26, 2004). Annual Meeting of the ACL. Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, 1.
Monasson et al., “Determining Computational Complexity from Characteristic ‘Phase Transitions’,” Jul. 1999, Nature Magazine, vol. 400, pp. 133-137.
Mooney, Raymond, “Comparative Experiments on Disambiguating Word Senses: An Illustration of the Role of Bias in Machine Learning,” 1996, Proc. of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 82-91.
Nagao, K. et al., “Semantic Annotation and Transcoding: Making Web Content More Accessible,” IEEE Multimedia, vol. 8, Issue 2 Apr.-Jun. 2001, pp. 69-81.
Nederhof, M. and Satta, G., “IDL-Expressions: A Formalism for Representing and Parsing Finite Languages in Natural Language Processing,” 2004, Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 21, pp. 281-287.
Niessen, S. and Ney, H, “Toward Hierarchical Models for Statistical Machine Translation of Inflected Languages,” 2001, Data-Driven Machine Translation Workshop, Toulouse, France, pp. 47-54.
Norvig, Peter, “Techniques for Automatic Memorization with Applications to Context-Free Parsing”, Computational Linguistics,1991, pp. 91-98, vol. 17, No. 1.
Och et al., “Improved Alignment Models for Statistical Machine Translation,” 1999, Proc. of the Joint Conf. of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Very Large Corpora, pp. 20-28.
Och et al. “A Smorgasbord of Features for Statistical Machine Translation.” HLTNAACL Conference. Mar. 2004, 8 pages.
Och, F., “Minimum Error Rate Training in Statistical Machine Translation,” In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting on Assoc. for Computational Linguistics—vol. 1 (Sapporo, Japan, Jul. 7-12, 2003). Annual Meeting of the ACL. Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, 160-167. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/1075096.
Och et al., “Discriminative Training and Maximum Entropy Models for Statistical Machine Translation.” Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Philadelphia, Jul. 2002; pp. 295-302.
Och, F. and Ney, H., “A Systematic Comparison of Various Statistical Alignment Models,” Computational Linguistics, 2003, 29:1, 19-51.
Papineni et al., “BLEU: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation,” IBM Research Report, RC22176 (WQ102-022), 2001, 12 pages.
Perugini, Saviero et al., “Enhancing Usability in CITIDEL: Multimodal, Multilingual and Interactive Visualization Interfaces,” JCDL '04, Tucson, AZ, Jun. 7-11, 2004, pp. 315-324.
Petrov et al., “Learning Accurate, Compact and Interpretable Tree Annotation,” Jun. 4-9, 2006, in Proc. of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL, pp. 433-440.
Pla et al., “Tagging and Chunking with Bigrams,” 2000, Proc. of the 18th Conference on Computational Linguistics, vol. 2, pp. 614-620.
Qun, Liu, “A Chinese-English Machine Translation System Based on Micro-Engine Architecture,” An Int'l. Conference on Translation and Information Technology, Hong Kong, Dec. 2000, pp. 1-10.
Rapp, Reinhard, Automatic Identification of Word Translations from Unrelated English and German Corpora, 1999, 37th Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 519-526.
Rapp, Reinhard, “Identifying Word Translations in Non-Parallel Texts,” 1995, 33rd Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 320-322.
Rayner et al.,“Hybrid Language Processing in the Spoken Language Translator,” IEEE 1997, pp. 107-110.
Resnik, P. and Smith, A., “The Web as a Parallel Corpus,” Sep. 2003, Computational Linguistics, Special Issue on Web as Corpus, vol. 29, Issue 3, pp. 349-380.
Resnik, P. and Yarowsky, D. “A Perspective on Word Sense Disambiguation Methods and Their Evaluation,” 1997, Proceedings of SIGLEX '97, Washington, D.C., pp. 79-86.
Resnik, Philip, “Mining the Web for Bilingual Text,” 1999, 37th Annual Meeting of the ACL, College Park, MD, pp. 527-534.
Rich, E. and Knight, K., “Artificial Intelligence, Second Edition,” 1991, McGraw-Hill Book Company [Front Matter].
Richard et al., “Visiting the Traveling Salesman Problem with Petri nets and application in the glass industry,” Feb. 1996, IEEE Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, pp. 238-242.
Robin, Jacques, “Revision-Based Generation of Natural Language Summaries Providing Historical Background: Corpus-Based Analysis, Design Implementation and Evaluation,” 1994, Ph.D. Thesis, Columbia University, New York.
Rogati et al., “Resource Selection for Domain-Specific Cross-Lingual IR,” ACM 2004, pp. 154-161.
Zhang, R. et al., “The NiCT-ATR Statistical Machine Translation System for the IWSLT 2006 Evaluation,” submitted to IWSLT, 2006.
Russell, S. and Norvig, P., “Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach,” 1995, Prentice-Hall, Inc., New Jersey [Front Matter].
Sang, E. and Buchholz, S., “Introduction to the CoNLL-2000 Shared Task: Chunking,” 2002, Proc. of CoNLL-2000 and LLL-2000, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 127-132.
Schmid, H., and Schulte im Walde, S., “Robust German Noun Chunking With a Probabilistic Context-Free Grammar,” 2000, Proc. of the 18th Conference on Computational Linguistics, vol. 2, pp. 726-732.
Schutze, Hinrich, “Automatic Word Sense Discrimination,” 1998, Computational Linguistics, Special Issue on Word Sense Disambiguation, vol. 24, Issue 1, pp. 97-123.
Selman et al., “A New Method for Solving Hard Satisfiability Problems,” 1992, Proc. of the 10th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, San Jose, CA, pp. 440-446.
Kumar, S. and Byrne, W., “Minimum Bayes-Risk Decoding for Statistical Machine Translation.” HLTNAACL Conference. Mar. 2004, 8 pages.
Shapiro, Stuart (ed.), “Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, 2nd edition”, vol. D 2,1992, John Wiley & Sons Inc; “Unification” article, K. Knight, pp. 1630-1637.
Shirai, S., “A Hybrid Rule and Example-based Method for Machine Translation,” 1997, NTT Communication Science Laboratories, pp. 1-5. Dec. 1997.
Sobashima et al., “A Bidirectional Transfer-Driven Machine Translation System for Spoken Dialogues,” 1994, Proc. of 15th Conference on Computational Linguistics, vol. 1, pp. 64-68.
Soricut et al., “Using a Large Monolingual Corpus to Improve Translation Accuracy,” 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2499, Proc. of the 5th Conference of the Association for Machine Translation in the Americas on Machine Translation: From Research to Real Users, pp. 155-164.
Stalls, B. and Knight, K., “Translating Names and Technical Terms in Arabic Text,” 1998, Proc. of the COLING/ACL Workshop on Computational Approaches to Semitic Language.
Sumita et al., “A Discourse Structure Analyzer for Japanese Text,” 1992, Proc. of the International Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Systems, vol. 2, pp. 1133-1140.
Sun et al., “Chinese Named Entity Identification Using Class-based Language Model,” 2002, Proc. of 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Taipei, Taiwan, vol. 1, pp. 1-7.
Tanaka, K. and Iwasaki, H. “Extraction of Lexical Translations from Non-Aligned Corpora,” Proceedings of COLING 1996.
Taskar, B., et al., “A Discriminative Matching Approach to Word Alignment,” In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (Vancouver, BC, Canada, Oct. 6-8, 2005). Human Language Technology Conference. Assoc. for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ.
Taylor et al., “The Penn Treebank: An Overview,” in A. Abeill (ed.), D Treebanks: Building and Using Parsed Corpora, 2003, pp. 5-22.
Tiedemann, Jorg, “Automatic Construction of Weighted String Similarity Measures,” 1999, In Proceedings of the Joint SIGDAT Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Very Large Corpora.
Tillman, C. and Xia, F., “A Phrase-Based Unigram Model for Statistical Machine Translation,” 2003, Proc. of the North American Chapter of the ACL on Human Language Technology, vol. 2, pp. 106-108. Mar. 2003.
Tillmann et al., “A DP Based Search Using Monotone Alignments in Statistical Translation,” 1997, Proc. of the Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 366-372.
Tomas, J., “Binary Feature Classification for Word Disambiguation in Statistical Machine Translation,” Proceedings of the 2nd Int'l. Workshop on Pattern Recognition, 2002, pp. 1-12.
Uchimoto, K. et al., “Word Translation by Combining Example-Based Methods and Machine Learning Models,” Natural Language Processing (Shizen Gengo Shori), vol. 10, No. 3, Apr. 2003, pp. 87-114. (Japanese original).
Uchimoto, K. et al., “Word Translation by Combining Example-based Methods and Machine Learning Models,” Natural Language Processing (Shizen Gengo Shori), vol. 10, No. 3, Apr. 2003, pp. 87-114. (English Translation).
Ueffing et al., “Generation of Word Graphs in Statistical Machine Translation,” 2002, Proc. of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pp. 156-163.
O'Brien, Sharon, “Towards predicting post-editing productivity”, Sep. 27, 2011, pp. 197-215.
Tatsumi, Midori, “Correlation between Automatic Evaluation Metric Scores, Post-Editing Speed, and Some Other Factors”, Jan. 2009, 9 pages.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20190303952 A1 Oct 2019 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 12720536 Mar 2010 US
Child 16443873 US