tech,4-1-P97-1015,ak |
existing methods . In the past the
<term>
|
evaluation
|
</term>
of
<term>
machine translation systems
|
#29142
In the past theevaluation of machine translation systems has focused on single system evaluations because there were only few systems available. |
|
tech,6-1-P97-1015,ak |
past the
<term>
evaluation
</term>
of
<term>
|
machine translation systems
|
</term>
has focused on
<term>
single system
|
#29144
In the past the evaluation ofmachine translation systems has focused on single system evaluations because there were only few systems available. |
|
tech,12-1-P97-1015,ak |
translation systems
</term>
has focused on
<term>
|
single system evaluations
|
</term>
because there were only few
<term>
|
#29150
In the past the evaluation of machine translation systems has focused onsingle system evaluations because there were only few systems available. |
|
tech,20-1-P97-1015,ak |
</term>
because there were only few
<term>
|
systems
|
</term>
available . But now there are several
|
#29158
In the past the evaluation of machine translation systems has focused on single system evaluations because there were only fewsystems available. |
|
tech,5-2-P97-1015,ak |
available . But now there are several
<term>
|
commercial systems
|
</term>
for the same
<term>
language pair
</term>
|
#29166
But now there are severalcommercial systems for the same language pair. |
|
other,10-2-P97-1015,ak |
commercial systems
</term>
for the same
<term>
|
language pair
|
</term>
. This requires new methods of
<term>
|
#29171
But now there are several commercial systems for the samelanguage pair. |
|
tech,5-3-P97-1015,ak |
</term>
. This requires new methods of
<term>
|
comparative evaluation
|
</term>
. In the paper we propose a
<term>
|
#29179
This requires new methods ofcomparative evaluation. |
|
tech,6-4-P97-1015,ak |
</term>
. In the paper we propose a
<term>
|
black-box method
|
</term>
for comparing the
<term>
lexical coverage
|
#29188
In the paper we propose ablack-box method for comparing the lexical coverage of MT systems. |
|
measure(ment),11-4-P97-1015,ak |
black-box method
</term>
for comparing the
<term>
|
lexical coverage
|
</term>
of
<term>
MT systems
</term>
. The method
|
#29193
In the paper we propose a black-box method for comparing thelexical coverage of MT systems. |
|
lr,5-5-P97-1015,ak |
systems
</term>
. The method is based on
<term>
|
lists of words
|
</term>
from different
<term>
frequency classes
|
#29204
The method is based onlists of words from different frequency classes. |
|
other,10-5-P97-1015,ak |
lists of words
</term>
from different
<term>
|
frequency classes
|
</term>
. It is shown how these
<term>
word
|
#29209
The method is based on lists of words from differentfrequency classes. |
|
lr,5-6-P97-1015,ak |
classes
</term>
. It is shown how these
<term>
|
word lists
|
</term>
can be compiled and used for
<term>
|
#29217
It is shown how theseword lists can be compiled and used for testing. |
|
tech,13-6-P97-1015,ak |
</term>
can be compiled and used for
<term>
|
testing
|
</term>
. We also present the results of
|
#29225
It is shown how these word lists can be compiled and used fortesting. |
|
other,16-7-P97-1015,ak |
systems
</term>
that translate between
<term>
|
English
|
</term>
and
<term>
German
</term>
. It is challenging
|
#29243
We also present the results of using our method on 6 MT systems that translate betweenEnglish and German. |
|
other,18-7-P97-1015,ak |
translate between
<term>
English
</term>
and
<term>
|
German
|
</term>
. It is challenging to translate
<term>
|
#29245
We also present the results of using our method on 6 MT systems that translate between English andGerman. |
|