Query translation architecture for Malay-English cross-language information retrieval system

This paper discusses research on query translation events in Malay-English Cross-Language Information Retrieval (CLIR) system. We assume that by improving query translation accuracy, we can improve the information retrieval performance. The dictionary-based CLIR system facing three main problems: translation ambiguity; compound and phrase handling and proper names translation. The use of natural language processing (NLP) techniques, such as stemming, Part-of-Speech (POS) tagging is useful in query translation process. Hence, n-gram matching technique has successfully applied to information retrieval (IR) system for phrases and proper names translation. The proposed query translation architecture consist of stemming, Part-of-Speech (POS) tagging and n-gram matching techniques is useful in CLIR system as well as search engine application

A Comparison of Approaches for Measuring Cross-Lingual Similarity of Wikipedia Articles

Wikipedia has been used as a source of comparable texts for a range of tasks, such as Statistical Machine Translation and CrossLanguage Information Retrieval. Articles written in different languages on the same topic are often connected through inter-language-links. However, the extent to which these articles are similar is highly variable and this may impact on the use of Wikipedia as a comparable resource. In this paper we compare various language-independent methods for measuring cross-lingual similarity: character n-grams, cognateness, word count ratio, and an approach based on outlinks. These approaches are compared against a baseline utilising MT resources. Measures are also compared to human judgements of similarity using a manually created resource containing 700 pairs of Wikipedia articles (in 7 language pairs). Results indicate that a combination of language-independent models (char-ngrams, outlinks and word-count ratio) is highly effective for identifying cross-lingual similarity and performs comparably to language-dependent models (translation and monolingual analysis).The work of the first author was in the framework of the Tacardi research project (TIN2012-38523-C02-00). The work of the fourth author was in the framework of the DIANA-Applications (TIN2012-38603-C02-01) and WIQ-EI IRSES (FP7 Marie Curie No. 269180) research projects.Barrón Cedeño, LA.; Paramita, ML.; Clough, P.; Rosso, P. (2014). A Comparison of Approaches for Measuring Cross-Lingual Similarity of Wikipedia Articles. En Advances in Information Retrieval. Springer Verlag (Germany). 424-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06028-6_36S424429Adafre, S., de Rijke, M.: Finding Similar Sentences across Multiple Languages in Wikipedia. In: Proc. of the 11th Conf. of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 62–69 (2006)Dumais, S., Letsche, T., Littman, M., Landauer, T.: Automatic Cross-Language Retrieval Using Latent Semantic Indexing. In: AAAI 1997 Spring Symposium Series: Cross-Language Text and Speech Retrieval, Stanford University, pp. 24–26 (1997)Filatova, E.: Directions for exploiting asymmetries in multilingual Wikipedia. In: Proc. of the Third Intl. Workshop on Cross Lingual Information Access: Addressing the Information Need of Multilingual Societies, Boulder, CO (2009)Levow, G.A., Oard, D., Resnik, P.: Dictionary-Based Techniques for Cross-Language Information Retrieval. Information Processing and Management: Special Issue on Cross-Language Information Retrieval 41(3), 523–547 (2005)Mcnamee, P., Mayfield, J.: Character N-Gram Tokenization for European Language Text Retrieval. Information Retrieval 7(1-2), 73–97 (2004)Mihalcea, R.: Using Wikipedia for Automatic Word Sense Disambiguation. In: Proc. of NAACL 2007. ACL, Rochester (2007)Mohammadi, M., GhasemAghaee, N.: Building Bilingual Parallel Corpora based on Wikipedia. In: Second Intl. Conf. on Computer Engineering and Applications., vol. 2, pp. 264–268 (2010)Munteanu, D., Fraser, A., Marcu, D.: Improved Machine Translation Performace via Parallel Sentence Extraction from Comparable Corpora. In: Proc. of the Human Language Technology and North American Association for Computational Linguistics Conf (HLT/NAACL 2004), Boston, MA (2004)Nguyen, D., Overwijk, A., Hauff, C., Trieschnigg, D.R.B., Hiemstra, D., de Jong, F.: WikiTranslate: Query Translation for Cross-Lingual Information Retrieval Using Only Wikipedia. In: Peters, C., Deselaers, T., Ferro, N., Gonzalo, J., Jones, G.J.F., Kurimo, M., Mandl, T., Peñas, A., Petras, V. (eds.) CLEF 2008. LNCS, vol. 5706, pp. 58–65. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Paramita, M.L., Clough, P.D., Aker, A., Gaizauskas, R.: Correlation between Similarity Measures for Inter-Language Linked Wikipedia Articles. In: Calzolari, E.A. (ed.) Proc. of the 8th Intl. Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2012), pp. 790–797. ELRA, Istanbul (2012)Potthast, M., Stein, B., Anderka, M.: A Wikipedia-Based Multilingual Retrieval Model. In: Macdonald, C., Ounis, I., Plachouras, V., Ruthven, I., White, R.W. (eds.) ECIR 2008. LNCS, vol. 4956, pp. 522–530. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Simard, M., Foster, G.F., Isabelle, P.: Using Cognates to Align Sentences in Bilingual Corpora. In: Proc. of the Fourth Intl. Conf. on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Machine Translation (1992)Steinberger, R., Pouliquen, B., Hagman, J.: Cross-lingual Document Similarity Calculation Using the Multilingual Thesaurus EUROVOC. In: Gelbukh, A. (ed.) CICLing 2002. LNCS, vol. 2276, pp. 415–424. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Toral, A., Muñoz, R.: A proposal to automatically build and maintain gazetteers for Named Entity Recognition using Wikipedia. In: Proc. of the EACL Workshop on New Text 2006. Association for Computational Linguistics, Trento (2006

Cross-Language Plagiarism Detection

Cross-language plagiarism detection deals with the automatic identification and extraction of plagiarism in a multilingual setting. In this setting, a suspicious document is given, and the task is to retrieve all sections from the document that originate from a large, multilingual document collection. Our contributions in this field are as follows: (1) a comprehensive retrieval process for cross-language plagiarism detection is introduced, highlighting the differences to monolingual plagiarism detection, (2) state-of-the-art solutions for two important subtasks are reviewed, (3) retrieval models for the assessment of cross-language similarity are surveyed, and, (4) the three models CL-CNG, CL-ESA and CL-ASA are compared. Our evaluation is of realistic scale: it relies on 120,000 test documents which are selected from the corpora JRC-Acquis and Wikipedia, so that for each test document highly similar documents are available in all of the six languages English, German, Spanish, French, Dutch, and Polish. The models are employed in a series of ranking tasks, and more than 100 million similarities are computed with each model. The results of our evaluation indicate that CL-CNG, despite its simple approach, is the best choice to rank and compare texts across languages if they are syntactically related. CL-ESA almost matches the performance of CL-CNG, but on arbitrary pairs of languages. CL-ASA works best on "exact" translations but does not generalize well.This work was partially supported by the TEXT-ENTERPRISE 2.0 TIN2009-13391-C04-03 project and the CONACyT-Mexico 192021 grant.Potthast, M.; Barrón Cedeño, LA.; Stein, B.; Rosso, P. (2011). Cross-Language Plagiarism Detection. Language Resources and Evaluation. 45(1):45-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-009-9114-zS4562451Ballesteros, L. A. (2001). Resolving ambiguity for cross-language information retrieval: A dictionary approach. PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA, Bruce Croft.Barrón-Cedeño, A., Rosso, P., Pinto, D., & Juan A. (2008). On cross-lingual plagiarism analysis using a statistical model. In S. Benno, S. Efstathios, & K. Moshe (Eds.), ECAI 2008 workshop on uncovering plagiarism, authorship, and social software misuse (PAN 08) (pp. 9–13). Patras, Greece.Baum, L. E. (1972). An inequality and associated maximization technique in statistical estimation of probabilistic functions of a Markov process. Inequalities, 3, 1–8.Berger, A., & Lafferty, J. (1999). Information retrieval as statistical translation. In SIGIR’99: Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval (vol. 4629, pp. 222–229). Berkeley, California, United States: ACM.Brin, S., Davis, J., & Garcia-Molina, H. (1995). Copy detection mechanisms for digital documents. In SIGMOD ’95 (pp. 398–409). New York, NY, USA: ACM Press.Brown, P. F., Della Pietra, S. A., Della Pietra, V. J., & Mercer R. L. (1993). The mathematics of statistical machine translation: Parameter estimation. Computational Linguistics, 19(2), 263–311.Ceska, Z., Toman, M., & Jezek, K. (2008). Multilingual plagiarism detection. In AIMSA’08: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on artificial intelligence (pp. 83–92). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Clough, P. (2003). Old and new challenges in automatic plagiarism detection. National UK Plagiarism Advisory Service, http://www.ir.shef.ac.uk/cloughie/papers/pas_plagiarism.pdf .Dempster A. P., Laird N. M., Rubin D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 39(1), 1–38.Dumais, S. T., Letsche, T. A., Littman, M. L., & Landauer, T. K. (1997). Automatic cross-language retrieval using latent semantic indexing. In D. Hull & D. Oard (Eds.), AAAI-97 spring symposium series: Cross-language text and speech retrieval (pp. 18–24). Stanford University, American Association for Artificial Intelligence.Gabrilovich, E., & Markovitch, S. (2007). Computing semantic relatedness using Wikipedia-based explicit semantic analysis. In Proceedings of the 20th international joint conference for artificial intelligence, Hyderabad, India.Hoad T. C., & Zobel, J. (2003). Methods for identifying versioned and plagiarised documents. American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(3), 203–215.Levow, G.-A., Oard, D. W., & Resnik, P. (2005). Dictionary-based techniques for cross-language information retrieval. Information Processing & Management, 41(3), 523–547.Littman, M., Dumais, S. T., & Landauer, T. K. (1998). Automatic cross-language information retrieval using latent semantic indexing. In Cross-language information retrieval, chap. 5 (pp. 51–62). Kluwer.Maurer, H., Kappe, F., & Zaka, B. (2006). Plagiarism—a survey. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 12(8), 1050–1084.McCabe, D. (2005). Research report of the Center for Academic Integrity. http://www.academicintegrity.org .Mcnamee, P., & Mayfield, J. (2004). Character N-gram tokenization for European language text retrieval. Information Retrieval, 7(1–2), 73–97.Meyer zu Eissen, S., & Stein, B. (2006). Intrinsic plagiarism detection. In M. Lalmas, A. MacFarlane, S. M. Rüger, A. Tombros, T. Tsikrika, & A. Yavlinsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the European conference on information retrieval (ECIR 2006), volume 3936 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 565–569). Springer.Meyer zu Eissen, S., Stein, B., & Kulig, M. (2007). Plagiarism detection without reference collections. In R. Decker & H. J. Lenz (Eds.), Advances in data analysis (pp. 359–366), Springer.Och, F. J., & Ney, H. (2003). A systematic comparison of various statistical alignment models. Computational Linguistics, 29(1), 19–51.Pinto, D., Juan, A., & Rosso, P. (2007). Using query-relevant documents pairs for cross-lingual information retrieval. In V. Matousek & P. Mautner (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (pp. 630–637). Pilsen, Czech Republic.Pinto, D., Civera, J., Barrón-Cedeño, A., Juan, A., & Rosso, P. (2009). A statistical approach to cross-lingual natural language tasks. Journal of Algorithms, 64(1), 51–60.Potthast, M. (2007). Wikipedia in the pocket-indexing technology for near-duplicate detection and high similarity search. In C. Clarke, N. Fuhr, N. Kando, W. Kraaij, & A. de Vries (Eds.), 30th Annual international ACM SIGIR conference (pp. 909–909). ACM.Potthast, M., Stein, B., & Anderka, M. (2008). A Wikipedia-based multilingual retrieval model. In C. Macdonald, I. Ounis, V. Plachouras, I. Ruthven, & R. W. White (Eds.), 30th European conference on IR research, ECIR 2008, Glasgow , volume 4956 LNCS of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 522–530). Berlin: Springer.Pouliquen, B., Steinberger, R., & Ignat, C. (2003a). Automatic annotation of multilingual text collections with a conceptual thesaurus. In Proceedings of the workshop ’ontologies and information extraction’ at the Summer School ’The Semantic Web and Language Technology—its potential and practicalities’ (EUROLAN’2003) (pp. 9–28), Bucharest, Romania.Pouliquen, B., Steinberger, R., & Ignat, C. (2003b). Automatic identification of document translations in large multilingual document collections. In Proceedings of the international conference recent advances in natural language processing (RANLP’2003) (pp. 401–408). Borovets, Bulgaria.Stein, B. (2007). Principles of hash-based text retrieval. In C. Clarke, N. Fuhr, N. Kando, W. Kraaij, & A. de Vries (Eds.), 30th Annual international ACM SIGIR conference (pp. 527–534). ACM.Stein, B. (2005). Fuzzy-fingerprints for text-based information retrieval. In K. Tochtermann & H. Maurer (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th international conference on knowledge management (I-KNOW 05), Graz, Journal of Universal Computer Science. (pp. 572–579). Know-Center.Stein, B., & Anderka, M. (2009). Collection-relative representations: A unifying view to retrieval models. In A. M. Tjoa & R. R. Wagner (Eds.), 20th International conference on database and expert systems applications (DEXA 09) (pp. 383–387). IEEE.Stein, B., & Meyer zu Eissen, S. (2007). Intrinsic plagiarism analysis with meta learning. In B. Stein, M. Koppel, & E. Stamatatos (Eds.), SIGIR workshop on plagiarism analysis, authorship identification, and near-duplicate detection (PAN 07) (pp. 45–50). CEUR-WS.org.Stein, B., & Potthast, M. (2007). Construction of compact retrieval models. In S. Dominich & F. Kiss (Eds.), Studies in theory of information retrieval (pp. 85–93). Foundation for Information Society.Stein, B., Meyer zu Eissen, S., & Potthast, M. (2007). Strategies for retrieving plagiarized documents. In C. Clarke, N. Fuhr, N. Kando, W. Kraaij, & A. de Vries (Eds.), 30th Annual international ACM SIGIR conference (pp. 825–826). ACM.Steinberger, R., Pouliquen, B., Widiger, A., Ignat, C., Erjavec, T., Tufis, D., & Varga, D. (2006). The JRC-Acquis: A multilingual aligned parallel corpus with 20+ languages. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’2006).Steinberger, R., Pouliquen, B., & Ignat, C. (2004). Exploiting multilingual nomenclatures and language-independent text features as an interlingua for cross-lingual text analysis applications. In Proceedings of the 4th Slovenian language technology conference. Information Society 2004 (IS’2004).Vinokourov, A., Shawe-Taylor, J., & Cristianini, N. (2003). Inferring a semantic representation of text via cross-language correlation analysis. In S. Becker, S. Thrun, & K. Obermayer (Eds.), NIPS-02: Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 1473–1480). MIT Press.Yang, Y., Carbonell, J. G., Brown, R. D., & Frederking, R. E. (1998). Translingual information retrieval: Learning from bilingual corpora. Artificial Intelligence, 103(1–2), 323–345

Japanese/English Cross-Language Information Retrieval: Exploration of Query Translation and Transliteration

Cross-language information retrieval (CLIR), where queries and documents are in different languages, has of late become one of the major topics within the information retrieval community. This paper proposes a Japanese/English CLIR system, where we combine a query translation and retrieval modules. We currently target the retrieval of technical documents, and therefore the performance of our system is highly dependent on the quality of the translation of technical terms. However, the technical term translation is still problematic in that technical terms are often compound words, and thus new terms are progressively created by combining existing base words. In addition, Japanese often represents loanwords based on its special phonogram. Consequently, existing dictionaries find it difficult to achieve sufficient coverage. To counter the first problem, we produce a Japanese/English dictionary for base words, and translate compound words on a word-by-word basis. We also use a probabilistic method to resolve translation ambiguity. For the second problem, we use a transliteration method, which corresponds words unlisted in the base word dictionary to their phonetic equivalents in the target language. We evaluate our system using a test collection for CLIR, and show that both the compound word translation and transliteration methods improve the system performance

Disambiguation strategies for cross-language information retrieval

This paper gives an overview of tools and methods for Cross-Language Information Retrieval (CLIR) that are developed within the Twenty-One project. The tools and methods are evaluated with the TREC CLIR task document collection using Dutch queries on the English document base. The main issue addressed here is an evaluation of two approaches to disambiguation. The underlying question is whether a lot of effort should be put in finding the correct translation for each query term before searching, or whether searching with more than one possible translation leads to better results? The experimental study suggests that the quality of search methods is more important than the quality of disambiguation methods. Good retrieval methods are able to disambiguate translated queries implicitly during searching

DCU and UTA at ImageCLEFPhoto 2007

Dublin City University (DCU) and University of Tampere(UTA) participated in the ImageCLEF 2007 photographic ad-hoc retrieval task with several monolingual and bilingual runs. Our approach was language independent: text retrieval based on fuzzy s-gram query translation was combined with visual retrieval. Data fusion between text and image content was performed using unsupervised query-time weight generation approaches. Our baseline was a combination of dictionary-based query translation and visual retrieval, which achieved the best result. The best mixed modality runs using fuzzy s-gram translation achieved on average around 83% of the performance of the baseline. Performance was more similar when only top rank precision levels of P10 and P20 were considered. This suggests that fuzzy sgram query translation combined with visual retrieval is a cheap alternative for cross-lingual image retrieval where only a small number of relevant items are required. Both sets of results emphasize the merit of our query-time weight generation schemes for data fusion, with the fused runs exhibiting marked performance increases over single modalities, this is achieved without the use of any prior training data

Beyond English text: Multilingual and multimedia information retrieval.

Non