dtrain ====== Build & run ----------- build ..
git clone git://github.com/qlt/cdec-dtrain.git cd cdec-dtrain autoreconf -if[v] ./configure [--disable-gtest] makeand run:
cd dtrain/hstreaming/ (edit ini files) edit the vars in hadoop-streaming-job.sh ($ID, $IN and $OUT) ./hadoop-streaming-job.shIdeas ----- * *MULTIPARTITE* ranking (1 vs rest, cluster model/score) * *REMEMBER* sampled translations (merge kbest lists) * *SELECT* iteration with highest real BLEU on devtest? * *GENERATED* data? (perfect translation always in kbest) * *CACHE* ngrams for scoring * hadoop *PIPES* imlementation * *ITERATION* variants (shuffle resulting weights, re-iterate) * *MORE THAN ONE* reference for BLEU? * *RANDOM RESTARTS* or directions * use separate *TEST SET* for each shard * *REDUCE* training set (50k?) * *SYNTAX* features (CD) * distribute *DEV* set to all nodes, avg Uncertain, known bugs, problems ------------------------------- * cdec kbest vs 1best (no -k param), rescoring (ref?)? => ok(?) * no sparse vector in decoder => ok/fixed * PhraseModel features, mapping? * flex scanner jams on bad input, we could skip that * input/grammar caching (strings -> WordIDs) * look at forest sampling... * devtest loo or not? why loo grammars larger? (sort psgs | uniq -> grammar) * lower beam size to be faster? * why is
nc-v6.de-en apegd nc-v6.de-en.loo apegd nc-v6.de-en.giza apegd nc-v6.de-en.giza.loo apegd nc-v6.de-en.cs.giza apegd nc-v6.de-en.cs.giza.loo apegd nv-v6.de-en.cs apegd nc-v6.de-en.cs.loo apegd -- ep-v6.de-en.cs apegd ep-v6.de-en.cs.loo apegd a: alignment:, p: prep, e: extract, g: grammar, d: dtrainExperiments ----------- [grammar stats oov on dev/devtest/test size #rules (uniq) time for building ep: 1.5 days on 278 slots (30 nodes) nc: ~2 hours ^^^ lm stats oov on dev/devtest/test perplex on train/dev/devtest/test?] [0] which word alignment? berkeleyaligner giza++ as of Sep 24 2011, mgizapp 0.6.3 --symgiza as of Oct 1 2011-- --- NON LOO (symgiza unreliable) randomly sample 100 from train with loo run dtrain for 100 iterations w/o all other feats (lm, wp, ...) +Glue measure ibm bleu on exact same sents ep -> berkeleyaligner ??? (mb per sent, rules per sent) [1] lm? 3-4-5 open unk nounk (-100 for unk) -- lm oov weight pos? -100 no tuning, -100 prob for unk EXPECT: nounk tuning with dtrain EXPECT: open => lmtest on cs.giza.loo??? [2] cs? 'default' weights [3] loo vs non-loo 'jackknifing' generalization (determ.!) on dev, test on devtest [4] stability all with default params mira: 100 pro: 100 vest: 100 dtrain: 100 [undecided] do we even need loo for ep? pro metaparam (max) iter regularization ??? mira metaparam (max) iter: 10 (nc???) vs 15 (ep???) features to try NgramFeatures -> target side ngrams RuleIdentityFeatures RuleNgramFeatures -> source side ngrams from rule RuleShape -> relative orientation of X's and terminals SpanFeatures -> http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~cdyer/wmt11-sysdesc.pdf ArityPenalty -> Arity=0 Arity=1 and Arity=2 --- variables to control [alignment] [lm] [vest] [mira] [dtrain] [pro] -------- In PRO, a continually growing list of candidates is maintained for each sentence by concatenating k-best lists from each decoding run, and the training pairs are sampled from them. This is done to ensure that the optimizer doesn't forget about bad places in the parameter space that it visited previously (since some training samples will be selected from that space). Something like your approach should work well though, provided you don't overfit to the sentence pair you're looking at in each iteration. So I guess the question is: what are you doing in step 2 exactly? A complete optimization? Taking one step? The other thing is, do you maintain n-best hypotheses from previous iterations? -------- good grammar? => ability to overfit berkeley vs giza not LOO NO optimizer instability 20+ iterations approx_bleu-4 train on dev => test on dev train on devtest => test on devtest dev on dev better? devtest on devtest better? (train/test on loo? => lower!) (test on others => real bad) loo vs non-loo? => generalization (cs vs non-cs?) giza||berkeley LOO + non LOO 2 fold cross validation train on dev, test on devtest train on devtest, test on dev as above ^^^