El 2017-02-08 00:34, Nikita Medyankin escribió:
> Now it wasn't. I'm not sure whether it was because of the lack of time
> at the end of the summer or because the gain from using weighted
> transfer seemed to be negligible. My personal opinion is that the
> weakest spot (both performance- and quality-wise) is the python module
> which calculates the coverages and is used in the weight training
> tool. Regarding this, it seems like an idea to adapt the C++ code from
> the core to calculate the coverages during training instead of using
> that python module.
>
I have a couple of comments to this:
1) One reason it could seem negligible is that there weren't so many
ambiguous
transfer rules in the tests. That the performance did not decrease is
already
a result! :)
2) Would it be possible to merge the changes to the C++ code ? Would it
cause any
problems in pairs that don't use the functionality ?
Fran
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
