TechGist05

The comparative measurement and quality assessment of the output of different MT systems is a task that has always been something that is difficult to do right. Right, in this context means, fair, reasonable, and accurate. The difficulty is closely related to the problems of measuring translation quality in general, that we discussed in this post . This difficulty is further aggravated when evaluating customized and/or adapted systems, since doing this requires special skills and real knowledge of each MT platform, in addition to time and money. The costs associated with doing this properly make it somewhat prohibitive. BLEU is the established measurement of choice, we all use, but it is easy to deceive yourself, deceive others, and paint a picture that has the patina of scientific rigor, yet be completely biased and misleadingly false. BLEU, as we know is deeply flawed , but we don't have anything better, especially for longitudinal studies, even though if you use it carefully, i...

Those who read my blog regularly know that I have been a fan of the Lilt MT technology for some time now. In my opinion, it is a significant leap forward in MT capability, especially for use in professional translation environments, even though the company seems to be struggling to convince and communicate the value of the technology to the target customer base. (BTW, I could help with that.) However, Lilt, is in fact, the pioneer of what they call interactive, adaptive MT. This is the technological step after post-editing as we know it today, a step towards something we might call a virtual translator assistant. So what is Lilt? It is a combination of all of the following: An MT system that learns and improves in real-time (i.e. instantly) as translators provide corrections, An interactive translation tool environment that responds dynamically to real-time translator edits and typing, A translator environment that integrates TM, Terminology, and MT in the most seamless and effective w...