Assigned Tuesday, March 17 Due Tuesday, April 28, 11:59pm online

# Introduction

The goal of previous homework assignments was to take a given data set and optimize something, whether it was model alignment, model decoding, an evaluation metric, or translation ranking. On this homework assignment, the data are what we are optimizing! Lots of classic machine translation datasets are curated, but that does not scale as well as harvesting translations organically. A common place to find them is by crawling the Internet; many websites are translated into multiple languages. We call these “parallel” websites. The question of this assignment is:

How can you algorithmically determine which websites are parallel?

We will study a fragment of the Common Crawl dataset, a collection of petabytes of website content crawled over the last seven or so years. You will algorithmically determine which websites are English-French parallel and feed those into a provided aligner and decoder. Thus, you are trying to optimize model score via pairing websites! We will use BLEU as an evaluation of model quality.

# Getting Started

To begin, download the Homework 5 starter kit. You may either choose to develop locally or on Penn servers. For the latter, we recommend using the Biglab machines, whose memory and runtime restrictions are much less stringent than those on Eniac. The Biglab servers can be accessed directly using the command ssh PENNKEY@biglab.seas.upenn.edu, or from Eniac using the command ssh biglab.

In the downloaded directory you will find a Python program called pair-finder, which crawls through the provided sandbox of sites and selects pairs simply based on URLs. Run the program with the command ./pair-finder -i PATH_TO_WARC.GZ FILE in your terminal.

This process is implemented following a simplified version of the MapReduce parallel architecture, and is based on the first step, Candidate Pair Selection, of the STRAND algorithm (Resnik and Smith, 2003).

The mapper first scans the sites for those with a URL that contains one of the following terms:

• english

• french

• en

• fr

The latter two should be more common, as they are valid ISO-639 codes. If such code is found and is surrounded by non-alphanumeric characters, the URL is identified as a potential match. The mapper then outputs a key-value pair, where the key is the URL with the code replaced by *, and the value is a tuple containing the original URL, the language name, and the full HTML markup of the page. For example, if the URL www.mt-class.org/fr/ is found, the following key-value pair is output:

• Key: www.mt-class.org/*/

• Value: www.mt-class.org/fr/, French, (full corresponding HTML page)

The reducer then receives all of the values mapped to the same generalized, language-independent URL, and searches the values for the existence of both English and French versions of the site. If we do have the same site in both languages, then the corresponding pairs are generated and fed into the data as parallel English and French documents.

This URL-based matching is a simple and inexpensive solution to the problem of mining candidate document pairs of English and French documents. The algorithm is relatively fast, as it only looks at the URLs of the sites and ignores the HTML markup. The nature of the web suggests that sites with URLs differing only by a short language code can act as good translations of each other, so this mining program gives our translation models solid data. To see how the provided translation models performed given your mined document pairs, simply run ./grade < output. This grade program takes your data and runs IBM Model 1 with it to generate a translational model. It then takes the model created and attempts to make alignments on our test set of French sentences. The accuracy of the alignments compared to human-made alignments is used for your score. In a general sense, more data and better data should correlate with a higher alignment score.

This model, though efficient, likely misses many good potential candidates. In fact, for many mining algorithms, it’s only the first step in finding parallel documents.

# The Challenge

Your task for this assignment is to algorithmically identify pairs of parallel English-French websites. As mentioned in the previous section, we have provided you with a default Python program called mine which identifies pairs based on URLs based on particular shared terms and the existence of English and French versions of a particular site.

The baseline that you must beat was achieved by automatically identifying URL pair patterns. This paper is a more nuanced implementation of the default heuristic.

You might consider implementing the following approaches as inspiration in identifying parallel websites:

# Ground Rules

• You must work independently on this assignment.

• You should submit each of the following:

1. Your parallel pairings uploaded from any Eniac or Biglab machine using the command turnin -c cis526 -p hw5 hw5.txt. You may submit new results as often as you like, up until the assignment deadline. The output will be evaluated using grade program. The top few positions on the leaderboard will receive bonus points on this assignment.
2. Your code, uploaded using the command turnin -c cis526 -p hw5-code file1 file2 .... This is due 24 hours after the leaderboard closes. You are free to extend the code we provide or write your own in whatever language you like, but the code should be self-contained, self-documenting, and easy to use.
3. A report describing the models you designed and experimented with, uploaded using the command turnin -c cis526 -p hw5-report hw5-report.pdf. This is due 24 hours after the leaderboard closes. Your report does not need to be long, but it should at minimum address the following points:
• Motivation: Why did you choose the models you experimented with?
• Description of models or algorithms: Describe mathematically or algorithmically what you did. Your descriptions should be clear enough that someone else in the class could implement them.
• Results: You most likely experimented with various settings of any models you implemented. We want to know how you decided on the final model that you submitted for us to grade. What parameters did you try, and what were the results? Most importantly: what did you learn?

Since we have already given you a concrete problem and dataset, you do not need describe these as if you were writing a full scientific paper. Instead, you should focus on an accurate technical description of the above items.

Note: These reports will be made available via hyperlinks on the leaderboard. Therefore, you are not required to include your real name if you would prefer not to do so.

• You do not need any other data than what is provided. You should feel free to use additional codebases and libraries except for those expressly intended to do parallel detection for you. You are free to use tools for DOM parsing, such as TagSoup, JTidy, etc. You are also free to use third-party tools to classify languages based on content. This may be useful if the website does not contain any metadata on what language it is in.