# neural_machine_translation_with_universal_visual_representation__e9ac3492.pdf

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

NEURAL MACHINE TRANSLATION WITH UNIVERSAL VISUAL REPRESENTATION

Zhuosheng Zhang1,2,3, Kehai Chen4, Rui Wang4, , Masao Utiyama4, Eiichiro Sumita4, Zuchao Li1,2,3 , Hai Zhao1,2,3,

1Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University 2Key Laboratory of Shanghai Education Commission for Intelligent Interaction and Cognitive Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China 3Mo E Key Lab of Artificial Intelligence, AI Institute, Shanghai Jiao Tong University 4National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NICT), Kyoto, Japan zhangzs@sjtu.edu.cn, charlee@sjtu.edu.cn, zhaohai@cs.sjtu.edu.cn, {khchen, wangrui, mutiyama, eiichiro.sumita}@nict.go.jp

Though visual information has been introduced for enhancing neural machine translation (NMT), its effectiveness strongly relies on the availability of large amounts of bilingual parallel sentence pairs with manual image annotations. In this paper, we present a universal visual representation learned over the monolingual corpora with image annotations, which overcomes the lack of largescale bilingual sentence-image pairs, thereby extending image applicability in NMT. In detail, a group of images with similar topics to the source sentence will be retrieved from a light topic-image lookup table learned over the existing sentence-image pairs, and then is encoded as image representations by a pretrained Res Net. An attention layer with a gated weighting is to fuse the visual information and text information as input to the decoder for predicting target translations. In particular, the proposed method enables the visual information to be integrated into large-scale text-only NMT in addition to the multimodal NMT. Experiments on four widely used translation datasets, including the WMT 16 English-to-Romanian, WMT 14 English-to-German, WMT 14 Englishto-French, and Multi30K, show that the proposed approach achieves significant improvements over strong baselines.

1 INTRODUCTION

Visual information has been introduced for neural machine translation in some previous studies (NMT) (Specia et al., 2016; Elliott et al., 2017; Barrault et al., 2018; Ive et al., 2019) though the contribution of images is still an open question (Elliott, 2018; Caglayan et al., 2019). Typically, each bilingual (or multilingual) parallel sentence pair is annotated manually by one image describing the content of this sentence pair. The bilingual parallel corpora with manual image annotations are used to train a multimodal NMT model by an end-to-end framework, and results are reported on a specific data set, Multi30K (Calixto & Liu, 2017; Calixto et al., 2017).

One strong point of the multimodal NMT model is the ability to use visual information to improve the quality of the target translation. However, the effectiveness heavily relies on the availability of bilingual parallel sentence pairs with manual image annotations, which hinders the image applicability to the NMT. As a result, the visual information is only applied to the translation task over a small and specific multimodal data set Multi30K (Elliott et al., 2016), but not to large-scale text-only NMT (Bahdanau et al., 2014; Gehring et al., 2017; Vaswani et al., 2017) and low-resource

Corresponding author. Zhuosheng Zhang and Zuchao Li were internship research fellows at NICT when this work was done. Hai Zhao was partially supported by Key Projects of National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. U1836222 and No. 61733011). Rui Wang was partially supported by JSPS grant-in-aid for early-career scientists (19K20354): Unsupervised Neural Machine Translation in Universal Scenarios and NICT tenure-track researcher startup fund Toward Intelligent Machine Translation.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

text-only NMT (Fadaee et al., 2017; Lample et al., 2018; Ma et al., 2019; Zhou et al., 2019). In addition, because of the high cost of annotation, the content of one bilingual parallel sentence pair is only represented by a single image, which is weak in capturing the diversity of visual information. The current situation of introducing visual information results in a bottleneck in the multimodal NMT and is not feasible for text-only NMT and low-resource NMT.

In this paper, we present a universal visual representation (VR) method1 relying only on image-monolingual annotations instead of the existing approach that depends on image-bilingual annotations, thus breaking the bottleneck of using visual information in NMT. In detail, we transform the existing sentence-image pairs into a topic-image lookup table from a small-scale multimodal data set Multi30K. During the training and decoding process, a group of images with a similar topic to the source sentence will be retrieved from the topic-image lookup table learned by the term frequency-inverse document frequency, and thus is encoded as image representations by a pretrained Res Net (He et al., 2016). A simple and effective attention layer is then designed to fuse the image representations and the original source sentence representations as input to the decoder for predicting target translations. In particular, the proposed approach can be easily integrated into the text-only NMT model without annotating large-scale bilingual parallel corpora. The proposed method was evaluated on four widely-used translation datasets, including the WMT 16 Englishto-Romanian, WMT 14 English-to-German, WMT 14 English-to-French, and Multi30K which are standard corpora for NMT and multimodal machine translation (MMT) evaluation. Experiments and analyses show effectiveness. In summary, our contributions are primarily three-fold:

1. We present a universal visual representation method that overcomes the shortcomings of the bilingual (or multilingual) parallel data with manual image annotations for MMT.

2. The proposed method enables the text-only NMT to use the multimodality of visual information without annotating the existing large scale bilingual parallel data.

3. Experiments on different scales of translation tasks verified the effectiveness and generality of the proposed approach.

2 RELATED WORK

Building fine-grained representation with extra knowledge is an essential topic in language modeling (Li et al., 2020a;b; Zhang et al., 2020b;a), among which adopting visual modality could potentially benefit the machine with a more comprehensive perception of the real world. Inspired by the studies on the image description generation (IDG) task (Mao et al., 2014; Elliott et al., 2015; Venugopalan et al., 2015; Xu et al., 2015), a new shared translation task for multimodal machine translation was addressed by the machine translation community (Specia et al., 2016). In particular, the released dataset Multi30K (Elliott et al., 2016) includes 29,000 multilingual (English, German, and French) parallel sentence pairs with image annotations (Elliott et al., 2017; Barrault et al., 2018). Subsequently, there has been a rise in the number of studies (Caglayan et al., 2016; 2017; Calixto et al., 2016; Huang et al., 2016; Libovick y & Helcl, 2017; Helcl et al., 2018). For example, Calixto et al. (2017) proposed a doubly-attentive multimodal NMT model to incorporate spatial-visual features, improving translation performance. Compared with spatial-visual features, Calixto & Liu (2017) further incorporated global image features as words in the source sentence and to enhance the encoder or decoder hidden state. In contrast, some recent studies indicated that the visual modality is either unnecessary (Zhang et al., 2017) or only marginally beneficial (Gr onroos et al., 2018). More recently, Ive et al. (2019) showed that visual information is only needed in particular cases, such as for ambiguous words where the textual context is not sufficient.

However, these approaches only center around a small and specific Multi30K data set to build a multimodal NMT model, which hinders image applicability to NMT. The reason would be the high cost of image annotations, resulting potentially in the image information not being adequately discovered. We believe that the capacity of MMT has not yet been excavated sufficiently, and there is still a long way to go before the potential of MMT is fully discovered. In this work, we seek to break this constraint and enable visual information to benefit NMT, especially text-only NMT.

1The code is publicly available at https://github.com/cooelf/UVR-NMT.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

3 UNIVERSAL VISUAL RETRIEVAL

Algorithm 1 Topic-image Lookup Table Conversion Algorithm Require: Input sentences, S = {X1, X2, . . . XI} and paired images E = {e1, e2, . . . , e I} Ensure: Topic-image lookup table Q where each word is associated with a group of images

1: Obtain the TF-IDF dictionary F = TF-IDF(S) 2: Transform sentence-image pair to topic-image lookup table Q = Look Up(S, E, F) 3: procedure TF-IDF(S) 4: for each sentence in S do 5: Filter stop-words in the sentence 6: Calculate the TF-IDF weight for each word 7: end for 8: return TF-IDF dictionary F 9: end procedure 10: procedure LOOKUP(S, E, F) 11: for For each pair {Ti, ei} zip{S, E} do 12: Rank and pick out the top-w topic words in the sentence according to the TF-IDF score in the dictionary F, and each sentence is reformed as T = {t1, t2, . . . , tw} 13: Pair the w words with the corresponding image ei 14: for For each word tjin T do 15: if ei not in Q[tj] then 16: Add ej to the corresponding image set Q[tj] for word tj 17: end if 18: end for 19: end for 20: return Topic-image lookup table Q 21: end procedure

In this section, we will introduce the proposed universal visual representation method. Generally, the default input setting of the MMT is a sentence-image pair. Our basic intuition is to transform the existing sentence-image pairs into topic-image lookup table2, which assumes the topic words in a sentence should be relevant to the paired image. Consequently, a sentence can possess a group of images by retrieving the topic-image lookup table.

Topic-image Lookup Table Conversion To focus on the major part of the sentence and suppress the noise such as stopwords and low-frequency words, we design a filtering method to extract the topic words of the sentence through the term frequency-inverse document frequency (TF-IDF)3 inspired by Chen et al. (2019). Specifically, given an original input sentence X = {x1, x2, . . . , x I} of length I and its paired image e, X is first filtered by a stopword list4 and then the sentence is treated as a document g. We then compute TF-IDF TIi,j for each word xi in g,

TIi,j = oi,j P k ok,j log |G| 1 + |j : xi g|, (1)

where oi,j represents the number of occurrences of the word xi in the input sentence g, |G| the total number of source language sentences in the training data, and |j : xi g| the number of source sentences including word xi in the training data. We then select the top-w high TF-IDF words as the new image description T = {t1, t2, . . . , tw} for the input sentence X. After preprocessing, each filtered sentence T is paired with an image e, and each word ti T is regarded as the topic word for image e. After processing the whole corpus (i.e., Multi30K), we form a topic-image lookup table Q as described in Algorithm 1, in which each topic word ti would be paired with dozens of images.

Image Retrieval For the input sentence, we first obtain its topic words according to the text preprocessing method described above. Then we retrieve the associated images for each topic word

2We use the training set of the Multi30K dataset to build the topic-image lookup table. 3We describe our methods by regarding the processing unit as word though this method can also be applied to a subword-based sentence for which the subword is considered to be the processing unit. 4https://github.com/stopwords-iso/stopwords-en

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

dog is playing in the snow dog (1,512)

playing (1,531)

(a) a black dog and a spotted dog are fighting (b) a dog is running in the snow (c) a dog is playing with a hose (d) a family playing on a tractor on a beautiful day (e) two people working on removing snow from a roof (f) a black dog and a white dog are standing on snow

corpus (29,000)

(a) (b) (c)

(d) (e) (f)

sentence-image pairs topic-image lookup table associated images for input sentence tokenize, filtering

word-image transform sampling

Figure 1: Illustration of the proposed visual retrieval.

from the lookup table Q and group all the retrieved images together to form an image list G. We observe that an image might be associated with multiple topic words so that it would occur multiple times in the list G. Therefore, we sort the images according to the frequency of occurrences in G to maintain the total number of images for each sentence at m.

Figure 1 illustrates the retrieval process5. In the left block, we show six examples of sentence-image pairs in which the topic words are in boldface. Then we process the corpus using the topic-image transformation method demonstrated above and obtain the topic-image lookup table. For example, the word dog is associated with 1,512 images. For an input source sentence, we obtain the topic words (in boldface) using the same preprocessing. Then we retrieve the corresponding images from the lookup table for each topic word. Now we have a list of images, and some images appear multiple times as they have various topics (like the boxed image in Figure 1). So we sort the retrieved image list by the count of occurrence to pick out the top-m images that cover the most topics of the sentence.

At test time, the process of getting images is done using the image lookup table built by the training set, so we do not need to use the images from the dev and test sets in Multi30K dataset6. Intuitively, we do not strictly require the manual alignment of the word (or concept) and image, but rely on the co-occurrence of topic word and image, which is simpler and more general. In this way, we call our method as universal visual retrieval.

4 NMT WITH UNIVERSAL VISUAL REPRESENTATION

In this section, we introduce the proposed universal visual representation (VR) method for NMT. The overview of the framework of our proposed method is shown in Figure 2.

4.1 SOURCE REPRESENTATION FOR NEURAL MACHINE TRANSLATION

In the state-of-the-art Transformer-based NMT (Vaswani et al., 2017), source information is encoded as source representation by an SAN-based encoder with multiple layers. Specifically, the encoder is composed of a stack of L identical layers, each of which includes two sub-layers. The first sublayer is a self-attention module, whereas the second is a position-wise, fully connected feed-forward network. A residual connection (He et al., 2016) is applied between the two sub-layers, and then

5More examples are provided in the Appendix A.1. 6The lookup table can be easily adapted to a wide range of other NLP tasks even without any paired image, and therefore opens our proposed model to generalization.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

Aggregation

Feed Forward

Multi-head Attention

Masked Multi-head Attention

Linear & Softmax

Output Probabilities

Feed Forward

Multi-head Attention

Positional Encoding

Input Embedding

Positional Encoding

Output Embedding

topic-image lookup table

Image Features (fixed Res Net)

Figure 2: Overview of the framework of our proposed method.

a layer normalization (Ba et al., 2016) is performed. Formally, the stack of learning the source representation is organized as follows:

H l = LN(ATTl(Ql 1, Kl 1, Vl 1) + Hl 1),

Hl = LN(FFNl(H l) + H l), (2)

where ATTl( ), LN( ), and FFNl( ) are the attention module, layer normalization, and the feedforward network for the l-th identical layer, respectively. {Ql 1, Kl 1, Vl 1} are query, key, and value vectors that are transformed from the (l-1)-th layer Hl 1. For example, {Q0, K0, V0} are packed from the summation H0 of the positional embeddings and word embeddings. Finally, the output of the stack of L identical layers HL is the final source sentence representation.

4.2 AGGREGATION FOR TEXT AND IMAGE REPRESENTATIONS

After retrieval as described in Section 3, each original sentence X = {x1, x2, . . . , x I} is paired with m images E = {e1, e2, . . . , em} retrieved from the topic-image lookup table Q. First, the source sentence X={x1, x2, . . . , x I} is fed into the encoder (Eq.2) to learn the source sentence representation HL. Second, the images E ={e1, e2, . . . , em} are the inputs to a pre-trained Res Net (He et al., 2016) followed by a feed forward layer to learn the source image representation text M Rm 2048. Then, we apply an attention mechanism7 to append the image representation to the text representation:

H = ATTM(HL, KM, VM), (3)

where {KM, VM} are packed from the learned source image representation M.

7We used single head here for simplicity.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

Intuitively, NMT aims to produce a target word sequence with the same meaning as the source sentence rather than a group of images. In other words, the image information may play an auxiliary effect during the translation prediction. Therefore, we compute λ [0, 1] to weight the expected importance of source image representation for each source word:

λ = sigmoid(WλH + UλHL), (4)

where Wλ and Uλ are model parameters. We then fuse HL and H to learn an effective source representation: H = HL + λH. (5) Finally, H is fed to the decoder to learn a dependent-time context vector for predicting target translation. Note that there is a single aggregation layer to fuse image and text information.

5 EXPERIMENTS

The proposed method was evaluated on four widely-used translation datasets, including WMT 16 English-to-Romanian (EN-RO), WMT 14 English-to-German (EN-DE), WMT 14 English-to French (EN-DE), and Multi30K which are standard corpora for NMT and MMT evaluation.

1) For the EN-RO task, we experimented with the officially provided parallel corpus: Europarl v7 and SETIMES2 from WMT 16 with 0.6M sentence pairs. We used newsdev2016 as the dev set and newstest2016 as the test set.

2) For the EN-DE translation task, 4.43M bilingual sentence pairs of the WMT14 dataset were used as training data, including Common Crawl, News Commentary, and Europarl v7. The newstest2013 and newstest2014 datasets were used as the dev set and test set, respectively.

3) For the EN-FR translation task, 36M bilingual sentence pairs from the WMT14 dataset were used as training data. Newstest12 and newstest13 were combined for validation and newstest14 was used as the test set, following the setting of Gehring et al. (2017).

4) The Multi30K dataset contains 29K English {German, French} parallel sentence pairs with visual annotations. The 1,014 English {German, French} sentence pairs visual annotations are as dev set. The test sets are test2016 and test2017 with 1,000 pairs for each.

5.2 SYSTEM SETTING

Image Retrieval Implementation We used 29,000 sentence-image pairs from Multi30K to build the topic-image lookup table. We segmented the sentences using the same BPE vocabulary as that for each source language. We selected top-8 (w = 8) high TF-IDF words, and the default number of images m was set 5. The detailed case study is shown in Section 6.2. After preprocessing, we had about 3K topic words, associated with a total of 10K images for retrieval. Image features were extracted from the averaged pooled features of a pre-trained Res Net50 CNN (He et al., 2016). This led to feature maps V R2048.

Baseline Our baseline was text-only Transformer (Vaswani et al., 2017). We used six layers for the encoder and the decoder. The number of dimensions of all input and output layers was set to 512 and 1024 for base and big models. The inner feed-forward neural network layer was set to 2048. The heads of all multi-head modules were set to eight in both encoder and decoder layers. For the Multi30K dataset, we further evaluated a multimodal baseline (denoted as MMT) where each source sentence was paired with an original image. The other settings were the same as our proposed model.

Model Implementation The byte pair encoding algorithm was adopted, and the size of the vocabulary was set to 40,000. In each training batch, a set of sentence pairs contained approximately 4096 4 source tokens and 4096 4 target tokens. During training, the value of label smoothing was set to 0.1, and the attention dropout and residual dropout were p = 0.1. We used Adam optimizer (Kingma & Ba, 2014) to tune the parameters of the model. The learning rate was varied

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

System Architecture EN-RO EN-DE EN-FR BLEU #Param BLEU #Param BLEU #Param Existing NMT systems

Vaswani et al. (2017) Trans. (base) N/A N/A 27.3 N/A 38.1 N/A Trans. (big) N/A N/A 28.4 N/A 41.0 N/A Lee et al. (2018) Trans. (base) 32.40 N/A 24.57 N/A N/A N/A Our NMT systems

Trans. (base) 32.66 61.54M 27.31 63.44M 38.52 63.83M +VR 33.78++ 63.04M 28.14++ 64.94M 39.64++ 65.33M Trans. (big) 33.85 207.02M 28.45 210.88M 41.10 211.66M +VR 34.46+ 211.02M 29.14++ 214.89M 41.83+ 215.66M

Table 1: Results on EN-RO, EN-DE, and EN-FR for the NMT tasks. Trans. is short for transformer. N/A denotes that those numbers are not reported in the corresponding literature. ++/+ after the BLEU score indicate that the proposed method was significantly better than the corresponding baseline Transformer (base or big) at significance level p<0.01/0.05.

under a warm-up strategy with 8,000 steps. For evaluation, we validated the model with an interval of 1,000 batches on the dev set. For the Multi30K dataset, we trained the model up to 10,000 steps, and the training was early-stopped if dev set BLEU score did not improve for ten epochs. For the ENDE, EN-RO, and EN-FR tasks, following the training of 200,000 batches, the model with the highest BLEU score of the dev set was selected to evaluate the test sets. During the decoding, the beam size was set to five. All models were trained and evaluated on a single V100 GPU. Multi-bleu.perl8 was used to compute case-sensitive 4-gram BLEU scores for all test sets. The signtest (Collins et al., 2005) is a standard statistical-significance test. In addition, we followed the model configurations of Vaswani et al. (2017) to train Big models for WMT EN-RO, EN-DE, and EN-FR translation tasks. All experiments were conducted with fairseq9 (Ott et al., 2019). The analysis in Section 6 is conducted on base models.

5.3 RESULTS

Table 1 shows the results for the WMT 14 EN-DE, EN-FR, and WMT 16 EN-RO translation tasks. Our implemented Transformer (base/big) models showed similar BLEU scores with the original Transformer (Vaswani et al., 2017), ensuring that the proposed method can be evaluated over strong baseline NMT systems. As seen, the proposed +VR significantly outperformed the baseline Transformer (base), demonstrating the effectiveness of modeling visual information for text-only NMT. In particular, the effectiveness was adapted to the translation tasks of the three language pairs, which have different scales of training data, verifying that the proposed approach is a universal method for improving translation performance.

Our method introduced only 1.5M and 4.0M parameters for the base and big transformers, respectively. The number is less than 3% of the baseline parameters as we used the fixed image embeddings from the pre-trained Res Net feature extractor. Besides, the training time was basically the same as the baseline model (Section 6.4).

In addition, the proposed method was also evaluated for MMT on the multimodal dataset, Multi30K. Results in Table 2 show that our model also outperformed the transformer baseline. Compared with the results in text-only NMT, we find that the image presentation gave marginal contribution, which was consistent with the findings in previous work (Zhang et al., 2017; Gr onroos et al., 2018; Caglayan et al., 2019). The most plausible reason might be that the sentences in Multi30K are so simple, short, and repetitive that the source text is sufficient to perform the translation (Caglayan et al., 2019; Ive et al., 2019). This verifies our assumption of the current bottleneck of MMT due to the limitation of Multi30K and shows the necessity of our new setting of transferring multimodality into more standard and mature text-only NMT tasks.

8https://github.com/moses-smt/mosesdecoder/tree/RELEASE-4.0/scripts/ generic/multi-bleu.perl 9https://github.com/pytorch/fairseq

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

System Architecture EN-DE EN-FR Test2016 Test2017 #Param Test2016 Test2017 #Param Existing NMT systems Calixto et al. (2017) RNN 33.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Elliott et al. (2017) RNN N/A 19.3 N/A N/A 44.3 N/A Elliott & K ad ar (2017) Imagination 36.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Ive et al. (2019) Trans. (big) 36.4 N/A N/A 59.0 N/A N/A Del 38.0 N/A N/A 60.1 N/A N/A Our MMT systems

MMT. (base) 35.09 27.10 50.72M 57.40 48.02 50.65M MMT. (big) 35.60 28.02 190.58M 57.87 49.63 190.43M Trans. (base) 35.59 26.31 49.15M 57.88 48.55 49.07M +VR 35.72 26.87 50.72M 58.32 48.69 50.65M Trans. (big) 36.86 27.62 186.38M 56.97 48.17 186.23M +VR 36.94 28.63 190.58M 57.53 48.46 190.43M

Table 2: Results from the test2016 and test2017 for the MMT task. Del denotes the deliberation network in (Ive et al., 2019). Elliott et al. (2017) is the official baseline (text-only NMT) on WMT17Multi30K 2017 test data. Trans. is short for transformer and MMT is the multimodal baseline described in Section 5.2. Because we used the same model for test2016 and test2017 evaluation, the numbers of parameters are the same.

6.1 WHY DOES THE LOOKUP TABLE WORK

The contribution of the lookup table could be two folds: 1) the content connection of the sentences and images; 2) the topic-aware co-occurrence of similar images and sentences. There are cases when paired images are not accurately related to the given sentence. A simple solution is to set a threshold heuristically for the TF-IDF retrieval to filter out the improper images. However, we maintain the specific number of the images in this work because of the second potential benefits of the cooccurrence, by taking images as diverse topic information. According to Distributional Hypothesis (Harris, 1954), which states that words that occur in similar contexts tend to have similar meanings, we are inspired to extend the concept in the multimodal world, the sentences with similar meanings would be likely to pair with similar even the same images. Therefore, the consistent images (with a related topic) could play the role of topic or type hints for similar sentence modeling.

This is also very similar to the idea of word embedding by taking each image as a word . Because we use the average pooled output of Res Net, each image is represented as a 2400-d vector. For all the 29,000 images, we have an embedding layer with size (29000, 2400). The content of the image is regarded as the embedding initialization. It indeed makes effects, but the capacity of the neural network is not up to it. In contrast, the mapping from text word to the index in the word embedding is critical. Similarly, the mapping of sentence to image in image embedding would be essential, i.e., the similar sentences (with the same topic words) tend to map the same or similar image.

To verify the hypotheses, we replace our Res Net features with 1) Shuffle: shuffle the image features but keep the lookup table; 2) Random Init: randomly initialize the image embedding but keep the lookup table; 3) Random Mapping: randomly retrieve unrelated images. The BLEU scores are on EN-RO are 33.53, 33,28, 32.14, respectively. The results of 1-2 are close to the proposed VR (33.78) and outperform the baseline (32.66), which shows that the content of images would not be very important. The ablation 3) gives a lower result, which verifies the necessity of the mapping, especially the topic relationship.

6.2 INFLUENCE OF THE NUMBER OF IMAGES

To evaluate the influence of the number of paired images m, we constrained m in {0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 15, 20, 30} for experiments on the EN-RO test set, as shown in Figure 4. When m = 0, the model is the baseline NMT model, whose BLEU score was lower than all the models with images. As the number of images increases, the BLEU score also increased at the beginning (from 32.66 to 33.78)

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

and then slightly decreased when m exceeds 5. The reason might be that too many images for a sentence would have a higher chance of noise. Therefore, we set m = 5 in our models.

The number of sentence-image pairs to create the lookup table could also make effects. We randomly split the pairs of Multi30K into the proportion in [0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9], the corresponding BLEU scores for EN-RO are [33.07, 33.44, 34.01, 34.06, 33.80]. Furthermore, we also evaluate the performance by adding external sentence-pairs from the training set of MS COCO image caption dataset (Lin et al., 2014). The BLEU scores are 33.55 and 33.71, respectively, for COCO only and Multi30K+COCO. These results indicate that a modest number of pairs would be beneficial.

6.3 THE INFLUENCE OF GATING WEIGHT λ

0 1 3 5 7 9 15 20 30

Number of images per sentence

Figure 4: Influence of the number of images on the BLEU score.

0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9

Manual weight Trans. (base) Ours

Figure 5: Quantitative study of the gating weight λ.

In our model, the weight λ of the gated aggregation method was learned automatically to measure the importance of the visual information. We compared by manually setting the weight λ into scalar values in {0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9} for experiments on the EN-RO test set. Figure 5 shows that all models with manual λ outperformed the baseline Trans. (base), indicating the effectiveness of image information. In contrast, they were inferior to the performance of our model. This means that the degree of dependency for image information varies for each source sentence, indicating the necessity of automatically learning the gating weights of image representations.

6.4 EXTRA COMPUTATION TIME

There are mainly two extra computation costs using our method, including 1) obtaining image data for sentences and 2) learning image representations, which are negligible compared with training an NMT model. The time of obtaining image data for MT sentences for the EN-RO dataset is less than 1 minute using GPU. The lookup table is formed as the mapping of token (only topic words) index to image id. Then, the retrieval method is applied as the tensor indexing from the sentence token indices (only topic words) to image ids, which is the same as the procedure of word embedding. The retrieved image ids are then sorted by frequency. Learning image representations takes about 2 minutes for all the 29,000 images in Multi30K using 6G GPU memory for feature extraction and eight threads of CPU for transforming images. The extracted features are formed as the image embedding layer with the size of (29000, 2400) for quick access in the neural network.

7 CONCLUSION

This work presents a universal visual representation method for neural machine translation relying on monolingual image annotations, which breaks the restraint of heavy dependency on bilingual sentence-image pairs in the current multimodal NMT setting. In particular, this method enables visual information to be applied to large-scale text-only NMT through a topic-image lookup. We hope this work sheds some light on future MMT research. In the future, we will try to adopt the proposed method for other tasks.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

Jimmy Lei Ba, Jamie Ryan Kiros, and Geoffrey E Hinton. Layer normalization. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1607.06450, 2016.

Dzmitry Bahdanau, Kyunghyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1409.0473, 2014.

Lo ıc Barrault, Fethi Bougares, Lucia Specia, Chiraag Lala, Desmond Elliott, and Stella Frank. Findings of the third shared task on multimodal machine translation. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Machine Translation: Shared Task Papers, pp. 304 323, 2018.

Ozan Caglayan, Lo ıc Barrault, and Fethi Bougares. Multimodal attention for neural machine translation. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1609.03976, 2016.

Ozan Caglayan, Walid Aransa, Adrien Bardet, Mercedes Garc ıa-Mart ınez, Fethi Bougares, Lo ıc Barrault, Marc Masana, Luis Herranz, and Joost van de Weijer. Lium-cvc submissions for wmt17 multimodal translation task. In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Machine Translation, pp. 432 439, 2017.

Ozan Caglayan, Pranava Swaroop Madhyastha, Lucia Specia, and Lo ıc Barrault. Probing the need for visual context in multimodal machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers), pp. 4159 4170, 2019.

Iacer Calixto and Qun Liu. Incorporating global visual features into attention-based neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 992 1003, 2017.

Iacer Calixto, Desmond Elliott, and Stella Frank. Dcu-uva multimodal mt system report. In Proceedings of the First Conference on Machine Translation: Volume 2, Shared Task Papers, pp. 634 638, 2016.

Iacer Calixto, Qun Liu, and Nick Campbell. Doubly-attentive decoder for multi-modal neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 1913 1924, 2017.

Kehai Chen, Rui Wang, Masao Utiyama, Eiichiro Sumita, and Tiejun Zhao. Neural machine translation with sentence-level topic context. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language Processing, 2019.

Michael Collins, Philipp Koehn, and Ivona Kucerova. Clause restructuring for statistical machine translation. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2005.

Desmond Elliott. Adversarial evaluation of multimodal machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 2974 2978, 2018.

Desmond Elliott and Akos K ad ar. Imagination improves multimodal translation. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 130 141, 2017.

Desmond Elliott, Stella Frank, and Eva Hasler. Multilingual image description with neural sequence models. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1510.04709, 2015.

Desmond Elliott, Stella Frank, Khalil Sima an, and Lucia Specia. Multi30k: Multilingual englishgerman image descriptions. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Vision and Language, pp. 70 74, 2016.

Desmond Elliott, Stella Frank, Lo ıc Barrault, Fethi Bougares, and Lucia Specia. Findings of the second shared task on multimodal machine translation and multilingual image description. In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Machine Translation, pp. 215 233, 2017.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

Marzieh Fadaee, Arianna Bisazza, and Christof Monz. Data augmentation for low-resource neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 567 573, 2017.

Jonas Gehring, Michael Auli, David Grangier, and Yann Dauphin. A convolutional encoder model for neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 123 135, 2017.

Stig-Arne Gr onroos, Benoit Huet, Mikko Kurimo, Jorma Laaksonen, Bernard Merialdo, Phu Pham, Mats Sj oberg, Umut Sulubacak, J org Tiedemann, Raphael Troncy, et al. The memad submission to the wmt18 multimodal translation task. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Machine Translation: Shared Task Papers, pp. 603 611, 2018.

Zellig S Harris. Distributional structure. Word, 10(2-3):146 162, 1954.

Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 770 778, 2016.

Jindˇrich Helcl, Jindˇrich Libovick y, and Dusan Varis. Cuni system for the wmt18 multimodal translation task. In Proceedings of the Third Conference on Machine Translation: Shared Task Papers, pp. 616 623, 2018.

Po-Yao Huang, Frederick Liu, Sz-Rung Shiang, Jean Oh, and Chris Dyer. Attention-based multimodal neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the First Conference on Machine Translation: Volume 2, Shared Task Papers, pp. 639 645, 2016.

Julia Ive, Pranava Madhyastha, and Lucia Specia. Distilling translations with visual awareness. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1906.07701, 2019.

Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1412.6980, 2014.

Guillaume Lample, Myle Ott, Alexis Conneau, Ludovic Denoyer, et al. Phrase-based & neural unsupervised machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 5039 5049, 2018.

Jason Lee, Elman Mansimov, and Kyunghyun Cho. Deterministic -autoregressive neural sequence modeling by iterative refinement. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 1173 1182, 2018.

Zuchao Li, Rui Wang, Kehai Chen, Masao Utiyama, Eiichiro Sumita, Zhuosheng Zhang, and Hai Zhao. Explicit sentence compression for neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the Thirty Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2020a.

Zuchao Li, Rui Wang, Kehai Chen, Masao Utiyama, Eiichiro Sumita, Zhuosheng Zhang, and Hai Zhao. Data-dependent gaussian prior objective for language generation. In Eighth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2020b.

Jindˇrich Libovick y and Jindˇrich Helcl. Attention strategies for multi-source sequence-to-sequence learning. In Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers), pp. 196 202, 2017.

Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Doll ar, and C Lawrence Zitnick. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In European conference on computer vision, pp. 740 755. Springer, 2014.

Xuezhe Ma, Chunting Zhou, Xian Li, Graham Neubig, and Eduard Hovy. Flowseq: Nonautoregressive conditional sequence generation with generative flow. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and the 9th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP), pp. 4273 4283, 2019.

Junhua Mao, Wei Xu, Yi Yang, Jiang Wang, and Alan L Yuille. Explain images with multimodal recurrent neural networks. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1410.1090, 2014.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

Myle Ott, Sergey Edunov, Alexei Baevski, Angela Fan, Sam Gross, Nathan Ng, David Grangier, and Michael Auli. fairseq: A fast, extensible toolkit for sequence modeling. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Demonstrations), pp. 48 53, 2019.

Lucia Specia, Stella Frank, Khalil Sima an, and Desmond Elliott. A shared task on multimodal machine translation and crosslingual image description. In Proceedings of the First Conference on Machine Translation: Volume 2, Shared Task Papers, pp. 543 553, 2016.

Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Ł ukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In I. Guyon, U. V. Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30, pp. 5998 6008, 2017.

Subhashini Venugopalan, Marcus Rohrbach, Jeffrey Donahue, Raymond Mooney, Trevor Darrell, and Kate Saenko. Sequence to sequence-video to text. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pp. 4534 4542, 2015.

Kelvin Xu, Jimmy Ba, Ryan Kiros, Kyunghyun Cho, Aaron Courville, Ruslan Salakhudinov, Rich Zemel, and Yoshua Bengio. Show, attend and tell: Neural image caption generation with visual attention. In International conference on machine learning, pp. 2048 2057, 2015.

Jingyi Zhang, Masao Utiyama, Eiichro Sumita, Graham Neubig, and Satoshi Nakamura. Nict-naist system for wmt17 multimodal translation task. In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Machine Translation, pp. 477 482, 2017.

Zhuosheng Zhang, Yuwei Wu, Hai Zhao, Zuchao Li, Shuailiang Zhang, Xi Zhou, and Xiang Zhou. Semantics-aware BERT for language understanding. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2020a.

Zhuosheng Zhang, Yuwei Wu, Junru Zhou, Sufeng Duan, Hai Zhao, and Rui Wang. SG-Net: Syntax-guided machine reading comprehension. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2020b.

Chunting Zhou, Xuezhe Ma, Junjie Hu, and Graham Neubig. Handling syntactic divergence in low-resource machine translation. ar Xiv preprint ar Xiv:1909.00040, 2019.

A.1 EXAMPLES OF RETRIEVED IMAGES

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

Topic-image Lookup Table

a man walks by a silver vehicle

an elderly woman pan frying food in a kitchen

small boy carries a soccer ball on a field

man (6,675)

woman (3,484)

Retrieved Images for Sentences

Figure 5: Examples of the topic-image lookup table and retrieved images for sentences in Multi30K dataset. We only show six images for each topic or sentence for instance. The topics in each sentence are in boldface.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2020

Retrieved Images for Sentences (WMT)

The old system of private arbitration courts is off the table

This issue is shaping as a potential early rift with the business community

He said he then heard his friend , Hamza calling to him

The red flag has been risen

The character attempts to pass human smugglers and then border police on his way to a refugee centre in the European Union .

Figure 6: Examples of the retrieved images for sentences in WMT datasets. We only show six images for each sentence for instance. The topics in each sentence are in boldface.