Incorporating Terminology Constraints in Automatic Post-Editing
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Users of machine translation (MT) may want to ensure the use of specific lexical terminologies. While there exist techniques for incorporating terminology constraints during inference for MT, current APE approaches cannot ensure that they will appear in the final translation. In this paper, we present both autoregressive and non-autoregressive models for lexically constrained APE, demonstrating that our approach enables preservation of 95% of the terminologies and also improves translation quality on English-German benchmarks. Even when applied to lexically constrained MT output, our approach is able to improve preservation of the terminologies. However, we show that our models do not learn to copy constraints systematically and suggest a simple data augmentation technique that leads to improved performance and robustness.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 19 Oct 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 1.
3 papers.
- 2024Guiding Large Language Models to Post-Edit Machine Translation with Error Annotationscited by 22
- 2021Rule-based Morphological Inflection Improves Neural Terminology Translationcited by 3
- 2022Contextualized Sensorimotor Norms: multi-dimensional measures of sensorimotor strength for ambiguous English words, in contextcited by 3
- 2024Guiding Large Language Models to Post-Edit Machine Translation with Error Annotations11 Apr 2024
- 2022Contextualized Sensorimotor Norms: multi-dimensional measures of sensorimotor strength for ambiguous English words, in context10 Mar 2022
- 2021Rule-based Morphological Inflection Improves Neural Terminology Translation10 Sep 2021