Apertium has moved from SourceForge to GitHub.
If you have any questions, please come and talk to us on #apertium on irc.freenode.net or contact the GitHub migration team.

Comparison of part-of-speech tagging systems

From Apertium
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 2: Line 2:
   
 
Apertium would like to have really good part-of-speech tagging, but in many cases falls below the state-of-the-art (around 97% tagging accuracy). This page intends to collect a comparison of tagging systems in Apertium and give some ideas of what could be done to improve them.
 
Apertium would like to have really good part-of-speech tagging, but in many cases falls below the state-of-the-art (around 97% tagging accuracy). This page intends to collect a comparison of tagging systems in Apertium and give some ideas of what could be done to improve them.
  +
  +
In the following table, the intervals represent the [low, high] values from 10-fold cross validation.
   
 
{|class=wikitable
 
{|class=wikitable

Revision as of 17:32, 21 December 2015

Contents

Apertium would like to have really good part-of-speech tagging, but in many cases falls below the state-of-the-art (around 97% tagging accuracy). This page intends to collect a comparison of tagging systems in Apertium and give some ideas of what could be done to improve them.

In the following table, the intervals represent the [low, high] values from 10-fold cross validation.

Language System
1st CG+1st Unigram CG+Unigram apertium-tagger CG+apertium-tagger
Catalan 81.85 83.96 [75.65, 78.46] [87.76, 90.48] [94.16, 96.28] [93.92, 96.16]
Spanish 86.18 86.71 [78.20, 80.06] [87.72, 90.27] [90.15, 94.86] [91.84, 93.70]
Kazakh 80.25 86.13 [83.55, 86.19] [83.33, 86.61] n/a n/a


Todo

Personal tools