Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data.

Kei Yuen Hung

dblp:93/2631 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2005
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Language models and text generation · 50% Transfer learning and domain adaptation · 50%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation › domain adaptation › domain adaptation for NLP
domain adaptation of language models
0.012000
Detection of Language (Model) Errors · EMNLP 2000

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

pattern recognition · 0.0neural network · 0.0decision tree · 0.0bayesian classifier · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2005 A multiple classifier approach to detect Chinese character recognition errors
Kei Yuen Hung, Robert Wing Pong Luk, Daniel S. Yeung, Korris Fu-Lai Chung, Wenhao Shu
Pattern Recognit.1
2000 Detection of Language (Model) Errors
abstract
The bigram language models are popular, in much language processing applications, in both Indo-European and Asian languages. However, when the language model for Chinese is applied in a novel domain, the accuracy is reduced significantly, from 96% to 78% in our evaluation. We apply pattern recognition techniques (i.e. Bayesian, decision tree and neural network classifiers) to discover language model errors. We have examined 2 general types of features: model-based and language-specific features. In our evaluation, Bayesian classifiers produce the best recall performance of 80% but the precision is low (60%). Neural network produced good recall (75%) and precision (80%) but both Bayesian and Neural network have low skip ratio (65%). The decision tree classifier produced the best precision (81%) and skip ratio (76%) but its recall is the lowest (73%).
Kei Yuen Hung, Robert Wing Pong Luk, Daniel S. Yeung, Korris Fu-Lai Chung, Wenhao Shu
EMNLP1