Paper detail

Assessing Wikipedia-Based Cross-Language Retrieval Models

This work compares concept models for cross-language retrieval: First, we adapt probabilistic Latent Semantic Analysis (pLSA) for multilingual documents. Experiments with different weighting schemes show that a weighting method favoring documents of similar length in both language sides gives best results. Considering that both monolingual and multilingual Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) behave alike when applied for such documents, we use a training corpus built on Wikipedia where all documents are length-normalized and obtain improvements over previously reported scores for LDA. Another focus of our work is on model combination. For this end we include Explicit Semantic Analysis (ESA) in the experiments. We observe that ESA is not competitive with LDA in a query based retrieval task on CLEF 2000 data. The combination of machine translation with concept models increased performance by 21.1% map in comparison to machine translation alone. Machine translation relies on parallel corpora, which may not be available for many language pairs. We further explore how much cross-lingual information can be carried over by a specific information source in Wikipedia, namely linked text. The best results are obtained using a language modeling approach, entirely without information from parallel corpora. The need for smoothing raises interesting questions on soundness and efficiency. Link models capture only a certain kind of information and suggest weighting schemes to emphasize particular words. For a combined model, another interesting question is therefore how to integrate different weighting schemes. Using a very simple combination scheme, we obtain results that compare favorably to previously reported results on the CLEF 2000 dataset.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.