Compositional Representation of Morphologically-Rich Input for Neural Machine Translation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Neural machine translation (NMT) models are typically trained with fixed-size input and output vocabularies, which creates an important bottleneck on their accuracy and generalization capability. As a solution, various studies proposed segmenting words into sub-word units and performing translation at the sub-lexical level. However, statistical word segmentation methods have recently shown to be prone to morphological errors, which can lead to inaccurate translations. In this paper, we propose to overcome this problem by replacing the source-language embedding layer of NMT with a bi-directional recurrent neural network that generates compositional representations of the input at any desired level of granularity. We test our approach in a low-resource setting with five languages from different morphological typologies, and under different composition assumptions. By training NMT to compose word representations from character n-grams, our approach consistently outperforms (from 1.71 to 2.48 BLEU points) NMT learning embeddings of statistically generated sub-word units.
Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 5 May 2018.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 5; 2022: 2; 2023: 2; 2024: 1; 2025: 0; 2026: 2.
12 papers.
- 2021Between words and characters: A Brief History of Open-Vocabulary Modeling and Tokenization in NLPcited by 130
- 2021Multi-view Subword Regularizationcited by 40
- 2021The Effectiveness of Morphology-aware Segmentation in Low-Resource Neural Machine Translationcited by 16
- 2021How Suitable Are Subword Segmentation Strategies for Translating Non-Concatenative Morphology?cited by 7
- 2023Neural Machine Translation for the Indigenous Languages of the Americas: An Introductioncited by 7
- 2024Low-resource neural machine translation with morphological modelingcited by 7
- 2021Rule-based Morphological Inflection Improves Neural Terminology Translationcited by 3
- 2023Towards Equipping Transformer with the Ability of Systematic Compositionalitycited by 2
- 2026Tokenization with Split Treescited by 2
- 2022Modeling Target-Side Morphology in Neural Machine Translation: A Comparison of Strategiescited by 1
- 2022The boundaries of meaning: a case study in neural machine translationcited by 1
- 2026LGSE: Lexically Grounded Subword Embedding Initialization for Low-Resource Language Adaptationcited by 0
- 2026Tokenization with Split Trees21 May 2026
- 2026LGSE: Lexically Grounded Subword Embedding Initialization for Low-Resource Language Adaptation23 Mar 2026
- 2024Low-resource neural machine translation with morphological modeling3 Apr 2024
- 2023Towards Equipping Transformer with the Ability of Systematic Compositionality12 Dec 2023
- 2023Neural Machine Translation for the Indigenous Languages of the Americas: An Introduction11 Jun 2023
- 2022The boundaries of meaning: a case study in neural machine translation2 Oct 2022
- 2022Modeling Target-Side Morphology in Neural Machine Translation: A Comparison of Strategies25 Mar 2022
- 2021Between words and characters: A Brief History of Open-Vocabulary Modeling and Tokenization in NLP20 Dec 2021
- 2021Rule-based Morphological Inflection Improves Neural Terminology Translation10 Sep 2021
- 2021How Suitable Are Subword Segmentation Strategies for Translating Non-Concatenative Morphology?2 Sep 2021
- 2021The Effectiveness of Morphology-aware Segmentation in Low-Resource Neural Machine Translation20 Mar 2021
- 2021Multi-view Subword Regularization15 Mar 2021