Untitled

Bond, Francis; Ogura, Kentaro

doi:10.1023/a:1008049304334

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The 1990s saw an intensification of research efforts aimed at endowing RMT-translated texts with the same document and discourse properties as their source texts (Webber, 2014). This included work on stylistics (Dimarco and Mah, 1994), discourse relations (Mitkov, 1993) and referring forms (Wada, 1990) (Bond and Ogura, 1998) and pronoun translation (Chan and T'sou, 1999) (Ferrández et al, 1999) (Nakaiwa, 1999). Discourse was widely investigated and demonstrated promising results in different aspects including language modelling (Foster et al, 2010), discourse connectives (Meyer and Poláková, 2013) (Meyer and Webber, 2013), lexical cohesion (Xiong et al, 2013), anaphora resolution (Le Nagard and Koehn, 2010) (Taira et al, 2012) and topic adaption (Su et al, 2012) (Hasler et al, 2014) in SMT development and researches.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Review of Discourse-Based Machine Translation Evaluation

Zhang¹,

Guo²,

Xu³

2018

Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Network, Communication, Computer Engineering (NCCE 2018)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews the discourse-based machine translation evaluation metrics. According to different methods of using, machine translation evaluation based on discourse is divided into two categories: evaluation based on discourse structure and evaluation based on discourse features. For these two different categories, we introduce their representative works, and compare the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Finally, we summarize the evaluation metrics based on discourse, points out the problems to be paid attention to when evaluating, and predicts the future development trends.

show abstract