Comparison and Adaptation of Automatic Evaluation Metrics for Quality Assessment of Re-Speaking

January 12, 2016 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› Computer Science

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Krzysztof Woล‚k, Danijel Korลพinek arXiv ID 1601.02789 Category cs.CL: Computation & Language Cross-listed stat.AP, stat.ML Citations 9 Venue Computer Science Last Checked 5 months ago
Abstract
Re-speaking is a mechanism for obtaining high quality subtitles for use in live broadcast and other public events. Because it relies on humans performing the actual re-speaking, the task of estimating the quality of the results is non-trivial. Most organisations rely on humans to perform the actual quality assessment, but purely automatic methods have been developed for other similar problems, like Machine Translation. This paper will try to compare several of these methods: BLEU, EBLEU, NIST, METEOR, METEOR-PL, TER and RIBES. These will then be matched to the human-derived NER metric, commonly used in re-speaking.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Computation & Language

๐ŸŒ… ๐ŸŒ… Old Age

Attention Is All You Need

Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, ... (+6 more)

cs.CL ๐Ÿ› NeurIPS ๐Ÿ“š 166.0K cites 9 years ago

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted