Language identification ("LI") is the problem of determining the natural language that a document or part thereof is written in. Automatic LI has been extensively researched for over fifty years. Today, LI is a key part of many text processing pipelines, as text processing techniques generally assume that the language of the input text is known. Research in this area has recently been especially active. This article provides a brief history of LI research, and an extensive survey of the features and methods used in the LI literature. We describe the features and methods using a unified notation, to make the relationships between methods clearer. We discuss evaluation methods, applications of LI, as well as off-the-shelf LI systems that do not require training by the end user. Finally, we identify open issues, survey the work to date on each issue, and propose future directions for research in LI.LI as a task predates computational methods -the earliest interest in the area was motivated by the needs of translators, and simple manual methods were developed to quickly identify documents in specific languages. The earliest known work to describe a functional LI program for text is by Mustonen (1965), a statistician, who used multiple discriminant analysis to teach a computer how to distinguish, at the word level, between English, Swedish and Finnish. Mustonen compiled a list of linguistically-motivated character-based features, and trained his language identifier on 300 words for each of the three target languages. The training procedure created two discriminant functions, which were tested with 100 words for each language. The experiment resulted in 76% of the words being correctly classified; even by current standards this percentage would be seen as acceptable given the small amount of training material, although the composition of training and test data is not clear, making the experiment unreproducible.In the early 1970s, Nakamura (1971) considered the problem of automatic LI. According to Rau (1974) and the available abstract of Nakamura's article, 1 his language identifier was able to distinguish between 25 languages written with the Latin alphabet. As features, the method used the occurrence rates of characters and words in each language. From the abstract it seems that, in addition to the frequencies, he used some binary presence/absence features of particular characters or words, based on manual LI. Rau (1974) wrote his master's thesis "Language Identification by Statistical Analysis" for the Naval Postgraduate School at Monterey, California. The continued interest and the need to use LI of text in military intelligence settings is evidenced by the recent articles of, for example, Rafidha Rehiman et al. (2013), Rowe et al. (2013), and Voss et al. (2014. As features for LI, Rau (1974) used, e.g., the relative frequencies of characters and character bigrams. With a majority vote classifier ensemble of seven classifiers using Kolmogor-Smirnov's Test of Goodness of Fit and Yule's characteristic (K), he managed...

We present a corpus of Finnish news articles with a manually prepared named entity annotation. The corpus consists of 953 articles (193,742 word tokens) with six named entity classes (organization, location, person, product, event, and date). The articles are extracted from the archives of Digitoday, a Finnish online technology news source. The corpus is available for research purposes. We present baseline experiments on the corpus using a rule-based and two deep learning systems on two, in-domain and out-of-domain, test sets.

This paper describes FinnPos, an open-source morphological tagging and lemmatization toolkit for Finnish. The morphological tagging model is based on the averaged structured perceptron classifier. Given training data, new taggers are estimated in a computationally efficient manner using a combination of beam search and model cascade. The lemmatization is performed employing a combination of a rule-based morphological analyzer, OMorFi, and a data-driven lemmatization model. The toolkit is readily applicable for tagging and lemmatization of running text with models learned from the recently published Finnish Turku Dependency Treebank and FinnTreeBank. Empirical evaluation on these corpora shows that FinnPos performs favorably compared to reference systems in terms of tagging and lemmatization accuracy. In addition, we demonstrate that our system is highly competitive with regard to computational efficiency of learning new models and assigning analyses to novel sentences.

HFST-Helsinki Finite-State Technology (hfst.sf.net) is a framework for compiling and applying linguistic descriptions with finite-state methods. HFST currently connects some of the most important finite-state tools for creating morphologies and spellers into one open-source platform and supports extending and improving the descriptions with weights to accommodate the modeling of statistical information. HFST offers a path from language descriptions to efficient language applications in key environments and operating systems. HFST also provides an opportunity to exchange transducers between different software providers in order to get the best out of each finite-state library.

The following claims can be made about finite-state methods for spell-checking: 1) Finite-state language models provide support for morphologically complex languages that word lists, affix stripping and similar approaches do not provide; 2) Weighted finite-state models have expressive power equal to other, state-of-the-art string algorithms used by contemporary spell-checkers; and 3) Finite-state models are at least as fast as other string algorithms for lookup and error correction. In this article, we use some contemporary non-finite-state spell-checking methods as a baseline and perform tests in light of the claims, to evaluate state-of-the-art finitestate spell-checking methods. We verify that finite-state spell-checking systems outperform the traditional approaches for English. We also show that the models for morphologically complex languages can be made to perform on par with English systems.