Moses-support Digest, Vol 107, Issue 12

Send Moses-support mailing list submissions to
moses-support@mit.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
moses-support-request@mit.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
moses-support-owner@mit.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Moses-support digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Re: [Moses-developers] Generation models with Mmsapt (Hieu Hoang)
2. Re: [Moses-developers] Generation models with Mmsapt
(Michael Denkowski)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 01:44:17 +0100
From: Hieu Hoang <hieuhoang@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Moses-support] [Moses-developers] Generation models with
Mmsapt
To: Michael Denkowski <michael.j.denkowski@gmail.com>
Cc: moses-support <moses-support@mit.edu>
Message-ID: <55E8E961.3020003@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

i saw your checkins, is it working for you now?

Your test data doesn't seem to run for me, the lexical reordering file
seems to be corrupt.

(if you wanna share test data, can you do it via dropbox/google drive
rather than the Moses github)

On 03/09/2015 05:13, Michael Denkowski wrote:
> Sounds good. I added a small test model to my branch:
> https://github.com/moses-smt/mosesdecoder/raw/mjdenkowski/mmsapt-factor-test.tar.gz.
> This translates a sample of fr-en news with a Mmsapt, surface LM, and
> 400-class LM.
>
> --Michael
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 2:56 AM, Hieu Hoang <hieuhoang@gmail.com
> <mailto:hieuhoang@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> It should work. The function
> EvaluateInIsolation()
> in the LM is for optimisation reason. eg. if the target phrase is
> 'a b c d' and the LM is a trigram, the trigrams 'a b c' and 'b c
> d' can be precalculated in EvaluateInIsolation().
>
> Implementing a pt for factors requires setting up some variables,
> which may not have happen yet in mmsapt. if you can send me a
> small example model, i'll see what i can do
>
>
> On 01/09/2015 02:11, Ulrich Germann wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> I have no experience with factored models, so I'm speculating
>> here to some degree. The reason the phrase table calls
>> EvaluateInIsolation is because all "isolated" phrase scores are
>> considered when pruning. In my opinion pruning should not happen
>> within the phrase tables (for exactly the reason that it does not
>> allow feature functions to be agnostic about other feature
>> functions) but by whatever object calls all the phrase tables and
>> does the generation. However, for software legacy reasons, that's
>> the way it is right now, and I'm not likely to address this issue
>> any time soon myself. The most reasonable fix for this in my
>> opinion is to move pruning where it belongs --- post all the
>> factor generation stuff.
>>
>> Hieu is probably still the person with the best understanding of
>> how factored phrase table entry generation works, so maybe he can
>> chime in on this ...
>>
>> Cheers - Uli
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Michael Denkowski
>> <michael.j.denkowski@gmail.com
>> <mailto:michael.j.denkowski@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ulrich,
>>
>> I was looking into using a class-based LM with your dynamic
>> phrase table via generation models. I translate factor 0 to
>> 0 with the Mmsapt, then generate target factor 1 (word class)
>> with a GM. The class-based LM operates on factor 1.
>>
>> I'm hitting a segfault on what appears to be an
>> order-of-operations issue with the PT and LM. In
>> mmsapt.cpp:578, Mmsapt::mkTPhrase makes a call to
>> tp->EvaluateInIsolation. This calls all of the models,
>> including the LMs. The class LM tries to score factor 1,
>> which doesn't exist yet (since generation happens after
>> translation), and it dies. By nature, other phrase tables
>> don't have this issue since they can just pull up
>> pre-computed scores.
>>
>> Is scoring with all of the models here a strategic choice to
>> get better performance or would it be sufficient to just
>> score with the PT features? Thanks!
>>
>> --Michael
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ulrich Germann
>> Senior Researcher
>> School of Informatics
>> University of Edinburgh
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moses-developers mailing list
>> Moses-developers@mit.edu <mailto:Moses-developers@mit.edu>
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-developers
>
> --
> Hieu Hoang
> Researcher
> New York University, Abu Dhabi
> http://www.hoang.co.uk/hieu
>
>

--
Hieu Hoang
Researcher
New York University, Abu Dhabi
http://www.hoang.co.uk/hieu

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/private/moses-support/attachments/20150903/46624bf6/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 22:49:50 -0400
From: Michael Denkowski <michael.j.denkowski@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Moses-support] [Moses-developers] Generation models with
Mmsapt
To: Hieu Hoang <hieuhoang@gmail.com>
Cc: moses-support <moses-support@mit.edu>
Message-ID:
<CA+-GegLWdSQLBw1Kx2XHwnXoiWfd90Eg=bqbFHsqog0fzgJqRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hi Hieu,

Yes, I have everything working together with the caveat about order in the
moses.ini file (https://github.com/moses-smt/mosesdecoder/pull/124). The
mmsapt files might be dependent on Boost version so I also included the
aligned bitext I used to build the model and rebuilt the tarball:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6trVKD0-obBRHFjMGxRZTJvV1U/view?usp=sharing.
I made it a pull request instead of just merging it into master so you guys
could look over the changes since technically the default behavior could
change if the moses.ini file lists phrase tables before other features.

Best,
Michael

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Hieu Hoang <hieuhoang@gmail.com> wrote:

> i saw your checkins, is it working for you now?
>
> Your test data doesn't seem to run for me, the lexical reordering file
> seems to be corrupt.
>
> (if you wanna share test data, can you do it via dropbox/google drive
> rather than the Moses github)
>
>
> On 03/09/2015 05:13, Michael Denkowski wrote:
>
> Sounds good. I added a small test model to my branch:
> <https://github.com/moses-smt/mosesdecoder/raw/mjdenkowski/mmsapt-factor-test.tar.gz>
> https://github.com/moses-smt/mosesdecoder/raw/mjdenkowski/mmsapt-factor-test.tar.gz.
> This translates a sample of fr-en news with a Mmsapt, surface LM, and
> 400-class LM.
>
> --Michael
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 2:56 AM, Hieu Hoang <hieuhoang@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It should work. The function
>> EvaluateInIsolation()
>> in the LM is for optimisation reason. eg. if the target phrase is 'a b c
>> d' and the LM is a trigram, the trigrams 'a b c' and 'b c d' can be
>> precalculated in EvaluateInIsolation().
>>
>> Implementing a pt for factors requires setting up some variables, which
>> may not have happen yet in mmsapt. if you can send me a small example
>> model, i'll see what i can do
>>
>>
>> On 01/09/2015 02:11, Ulrich Germann wrote:
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> I have no experience with factored models, so I'm speculating here to
>> some degree. The reason the phrase table calls EvaluateInIsolation is
>> because all "isolated" phrase scores are considered when pruning. In my
>> opinion pruning should not happen within the phrase tables (for exactly the
>> reason that it does not allow feature functions to be agnostic about other
>> feature functions) but by whatever object calls all the phrase tables and
>> does the generation. However, for software legacy reasons, that's the way
>> it is right now, and I'm not likely to address this issue any time soon
>> myself. The most reasonable fix for this in my opinion is to move pruning
>> where it belongs --- post all the factor generation stuff.
>>
>> Hieu is probably still the person with the best understanding of how
>> factored phrase table entry generation works, so maybe he can chime in on
>> this ...
>>
>> Cheers - Uli
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Michael Denkowski <
>> <michael.j.denkowski@gmail.com>michael.j.denkowski@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ulrich,
>>>
>>> I was looking into using a class-based LM with your dynamic phrase table
>>> via generation models. I translate factor 0 to 0 with the Mmsapt, then
>>> generate target factor 1 (word class) with a GM. The class-based LM
>>> operates on factor 1.
>>>
>>> I'm hitting a segfault on what appears to be an order-of-operations
>>> issue with the PT and LM. In mmsapt.cpp:578, Mmsapt::mkTPhrase makes a
>>> call to tp->EvaluateInIsolation. This calls all of the models, including
>>> the LMs. The class LM tries to score factor 1, which doesn't exist yet
>>> (since generation happens after translation), and it dies. By nature,
>>> other phrase tables don't have this issue since they can just pull up
>>> pre-computed scores.
>>>
>>> Is scoring with all of the models here a strategic choice to get better
>>> performance or would it be sufficient to just score with the PT features?
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> --Michael
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ulrich Germann
>> Senior Researcher
>> School of Informatics
>> University of Edinburgh
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moses-developers mailing listMoses-developers@mit.eduhttp://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-developers
>>
>>
>> --
>> Hieu Hoang
>> Researcher
>> New York University, Abu Dhabihttp://www.hoang.co.uk/hieu
>>
>>
>
> --
> Hieu Hoang
> Researcher
> New York University, Abu Dhabihttp://www.hoang.co.uk/hieu
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/private/moses-support/attachments/20150903/79cc7bde/attachment.html

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Moses-support mailing list
Moses-support@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support


End of Moses-support Digest, Vol 107, Issue 12
**********************************************

Tweet