CafeTran

At Proz Michael wrote: Roy mentioned that it sounds like the Deep Miner in Déjà Vu. CafeTran has its own version, simply called "auto-assembly", which a few users love, and **most of us leave switched off**. It really depends on how carefully you prepare the resources it feeds off of, and of course, the type of work you do (preferably highly standardised, repetitive, consisting of small chunks, etc). ** would that be true?

I swore I wasn't going to post here, but I had to sign up anyway for support tickets, and necessity knows no laws.

Subsegments matching/Hits/DeepMiner != Auto-Assemble, as I mentioned on ProZ. 

My next posting is a copy of the one that will most probably be declined by the ProZ moderators, and is an answer to the "inventor" of LIFT.

H.

Summary

[quote]kflanagansdl wrote:

...you’re right to be sceptical about performance based on a demo video, but more extensive tests show Lift performing much better than DeepMiner. You can read more about those tests at...[/quote]

I successfully reproduced the test mentioned <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.kftrans.co.uk/lift/">above</a>. That's not much of a surprise. Subsegment matching has been available in CafeTran for several years (even before DV's DeepMiner), and it just works.

<img src="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2184204/ProZ/LIFT%20vs%20CafeTran%20copy.png">

It shows the "hit" where you'd expect it, in the TM (1), or you can evoke it from the menu (2). By the way, it works for all languages.

I agree with you, kflanagan<b>sdl</b> that the demo is no proof of the performance, but I do doubt your statement LIFT performs better than DeepMiner, let alone CafeTran. The results of your "more extensive tests" would need to be expanded to include method and real-life situations, in particular in the very CAT tool. Yes, I challenge you.

To summarise:

[*] LIFT is late to the party

[*] It's not yet at the party at all

[*] At the moment, it works for a very limited number (4) of languages only

[*] It may work better than other subsegment matching algorithms, but we want proof

Cheers,

Hans

--------------

I attached the image:

HansCW: "We missed you here!"

I'm not back. And I'm sure you'd love to miss me again.

H.

As expected, the ProTradoZ moderators didn't approve my posting. The strange thing is, that an "empty" later posting was deleted long before my posting was declined. It seems the moderator had to confer with his superiors to solve this nasty problem. I'm not sure if you can call ProZ a criminal organisation yet.

Here's my posting in its full glory:

H.

Welcome home, Mr Words. May the light of kindness always shine on your sweet visage.

Of course, blame me, not ProZ. The LIFT MF, out of the blue, claimed that DV's DeepMiner was inferior to LIFT. He posted on DV in a Trados forum. Fuck him. Fuck them.

H.

Igor: "Thanks for mentioning the subsegment matching in the Proz forum. The function has been present in CT for a few years, and if well tuned, it can be used with excellent accuracy both with Auto-assembling and Auto-completion"

Now rather than here, on your own forum, post the above on ProZ. Then we're talking.

H.

And don't worry, I'm off again.

H.

Back to HansL's original question:

I haven't switched off auto-assembling, but it hardly ever produced usable results for me. I think it's really because I don't translate texts that are "preferably highly standardised, repetitive, consisting of small chunks, etc", as Hans has put it so nicely. My texts are mostly legal texts, and memory matching helps me a lot, but auto-assembling doesn't (or at least hasn't so far).

 

I translate mainly patents. So I do use AA from time to time (but by pressing F1, so that I can decide whether to use it or not). Kwang

Why F1? If you enable Insert, and you don't like the result, just hit any key, and the AA matches will disappear. But at least you've taken notice of them, and that can't hurt. Actually, AA is a CT core function, and I cannot see any reason not to use it (although this may not be true for some language pairs. With the stress on may).

H.