Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association For Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) 2017
DOI: 10.18653/v1/p17-2061
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Empirical Comparison of Domain Adaptation Methods for Neural Machine Translation

Abstract: In this paper, we propose a novel domain adaptation method named "mixed fine tuning" for neural machine translation (NMT). We combine two existing approaches namely fine tuning and multi domain NMT. We first train an NMT model on an out-of-domain parallel corpus, and then fine tune it on a parallel corpus which is a mix of the in-domain and out-ofdomain corpora. All corpora are augmented with artificial tags to indicate specific domains. We empirically compare our proposed method against fine tuning and multi … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
174
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 176 publications
(188 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
1
174
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These techniques are largely orthogonal to ours 1 and can be used in combination. In fact, Chu et al (2017) successfully apply fine-tuning in combination with joint training.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These techniques are largely orthogonal to ours 1 and can be used in combination. In fact, Chu et al (2017) successfully apply fine-tuning in combination with joint training.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this aspect, fine-tuning (Luong and Manning, 2015;Zoph et al, 2016;Servan et al, 2016) is the most popular approach, where the NMT model is first trained using the out-of-domain training corpus, and then fine-tuned on the in-domain training corpus. To avoid overfitting, Chu et al (2017) blended in-domain with out-of-domain corpora to fine-tune the pre-trained model, and Freitag and Al-Onaizan (2016) combined the fine-tuned model with the baseline via ensemble method. Meanwhile, applying data weighting into NMT domain adaptation has attracted much attention.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The other is to use the mixed-domain training corpus to construct a unified NMT model for all domains. Here, we mainly focus on the first type of research, of which typical methods include finetuning (Luong and Manning, 2015;Zoph et al, 2016;Servan et al, 2016), mixed fine-tuning (Chu et al, 2017), cost weighting , data selection (Wang et al, 2017a,b;Zhang et al, 2019a) and so on. The underlying assumption of these approaches is that in-domain and out-ofdomain NMT models share the same parameter space or prior distributions, and the useful out-ofdomain translation knowledge can be completely transferred to in-domain NMT model in a onepass manner.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The task requires both style transfer and domain-specific generation on the target domain. To differentiate different domains, Sennrich et al (2016a); Chu et al (2017) appended domain tokens to the input sentences. Our model uses learnable domain vectors combining domain-specific style classifiers, which force the model to learn distinct stylized information in each domain.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%