Automatic Evaluation Method using Noun-Phrase Chunking | Secondly, the system calculates word-level scores based on the correct matched words using the determined correspondences of noun phrases. |
Automatic Evaluation Method using Noun-Phrase Chunking | The system calculates the final scores combining word-level scores and phrase-level scores. |
Automatic Evaluation Method using Noun-Phrase Chunking | 2.2 Word-level Score |
Experimental design | We report both word-level and letter-level error rates. |
Experimental design | The word-level error rate is the fraction of words on which a method makes at least one mistake. |
Experimental design | Specifically, for English our word-level accuracy (“ower”) is 96.33% while their best (“WA”) is 95.65%. |
Experimental results | For both languages, PAT GEN has higher serious letter-level and word-level error rates than TEX using the existing pattern files. |
History of automated hyphenation | The accuracy we achieve is slightly higher: word-level accuracy of 96.33% compared to their |
A Phrase-Based Error Model | Furthermore, the word-level alignments between Q and C can most often be identified with little ambiguity. |
A Phrase-Based Error Model | Thus we restrict our attention to those phrase transformations consistent with a good word-level alignment. |
Related Work | (2006) extend the error model by capturing word-level similarities learned from query logs. |
Introduction | In Section 2, we review the previous work on word-level confidence estimation which is used for error detection. |
Related Work | Ueffing and Ney (2007) exhaustively explore various word-level confidence measures to label each word in a generated translation hypothesis as correct or incorrect. |
Related Work | (2009) study several confidence features based on mutual information between words and n-gram and backward n-gram language model for word-level and sentence-level CE. |