{"title":"用向量和ASR转录本识别阿拉伯语方言","authors":"S. Malmasi, Marcos Zampieri","doi":"10.18653/v1/W17-1222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents the systems submitted by the MAZA team to the Arabic Dialect Identification (ADI) shared task at the VarDial Evaluation Campaign 2017. The goal of the task is to evaluate computational models to identify the dialect of Arabic utterances using both audio and text transcriptions. The ADI shared task dataset included Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and four Arabic dialects: Egyptian, Gulf, Levantine, and North-African. The three systems submitted by MAZA are based on combinations of multiple machine learning classifiers arranged as (1) voting ensemble; (2) mean probability ensemble; (3) meta-classifier. The best results were obtained by the meta-classifier achieving 71.7% accuracy, ranking second among the six teams which participated in the ADI shared task.","PeriodicalId":167439,"journal":{"name":"Workshop on NLP for Similar Languages, Varieties and Dialects","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"32","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Arabic Dialect Identification Using iVectors and ASR Transcripts\",\"authors\":\"S. Malmasi, Marcos Zampieri\",\"doi\":\"10.18653/v1/W17-1222\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper presents the systems submitted by the MAZA team to the Arabic Dialect Identification (ADI) shared task at the VarDial Evaluation Campaign 2017. The goal of the task is to evaluate computational models to identify the dialect of Arabic utterances using both audio and text transcriptions. The ADI shared task dataset included Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and four Arabic dialects: Egyptian, Gulf, Levantine, and North-African. The three systems submitted by MAZA are based on combinations of multiple machine learning classifiers arranged as (1) voting ensemble; (2) mean probability ensemble; (3) meta-classifier. The best results were obtained by the meta-classifier achieving 71.7% accuracy, ranking second among the six teams which participated in the ADI shared task.\",\"PeriodicalId\":167439,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Workshop on NLP for Similar Languages, Varieties and Dialects\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"32\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Workshop on NLP for Similar Languages, Varieties and Dialects\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W17-1222\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Workshop on NLP for Similar Languages, Varieties and Dialects","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W17-1222","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Arabic Dialect Identification Using iVectors and ASR Transcripts
This paper presents the systems submitted by the MAZA team to the Arabic Dialect Identification (ADI) shared task at the VarDial Evaluation Campaign 2017. The goal of the task is to evaluate computational models to identify the dialect of Arabic utterances using both audio and text transcriptions. The ADI shared task dataset included Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and four Arabic dialects: Egyptian, Gulf, Levantine, and North-African. The three systems submitted by MAZA are based on combinations of multiple machine learning classifiers arranged as (1) voting ensemble; (2) mean probability ensemble; (3) meta-classifier. The best results were obtained by the meta-classifier achieving 71.7% accuracy, ranking second among the six teams which participated in the ADI shared task.