Proofreading support device, proofreading support method, and program

Abstract

To provide a proofreading assisting device, a proofreading assisting method and a program capable of extracting a letter string that has a possibility of an orthographical variant without increasing a necessary time for proofreading even if a sentence is a long sentence.SOLUTION: A proofreading assisting device includes: an obtaining unit that obtains a target sentence as a target of proofreading; a dividing unit that generates divided sentences obtained by dividing the target sentence into at least three or more; a connecting unit that generates a connected sentence which is obtained by connecting different divided sentences from each other among the divided sentences and is shorter than the target sentence; and an evaluating unit that extracts a letter sting which is a candidate for an orthographical variant in the connected sentence.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 2

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a proofreading support device, a proofreading support method, and a program. [Background technology]

[0002] Proofreading of spelling variations in text is currently being carried out. For example, Patent Document 1 discloses a technology that extracts character strings that are candidates for spelling variations from a text to be proofread, and compares the extracted candidates with the spellings of other candidates to determine whether or not there is a spelling variation. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 3-184162 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] In the method described in Patent Document 1, a character string extracted from a sentence is compared with all other candidate spellings. For example, if the number of character strings extracted from a sentence is K (K is an arbitrary natural number), the number of comparisons is K × (K-1). Therefore, if the sentence to be proofread is short, about 10,000 words, the number of comparisons will be about 10,000,000 times. However, if the sentence is long, about 1 million words, the number of comparisons will increase exponentially. This poses a problem in that it can take days to check spelling variations in a long sentence, making it unrealistic.

[0005] The present invention has been made in consideration of the above situation, and aims to provide a proofreading support device, a proofreading support method, and a program that can extract character strings that may have spelling variations without increasing the time required for proofreading, even in long sentences. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] The proofreading support device of the present invention comprises an acquisition unit that acquires a target sentence to be proofread; a division unit that divides the target sentence into at least three or more segments to generate split sentences; a concatenation unit that generates concatenated sentences that are shorter than the target sentence by concatenating different segments from the split sentences; and an evaluation unit that extracts character strings that are candidates for spelling variations in the concatenated sentences.

[0007] The proofreading support method of the present invention is a proofreading support method performed by a computer, in which an acquisition unit acquires a target sentence to be proofread, a division unit generates divided sentences by dividing the target sentence into at least three or more segments, a concatenation unit generates concatenated sentences by concatenating different segments from the divided sentences, the concatenated sentences being shorter than the target sentence, and an evaluation unit extracts character strings that are candidates for spelling variations in the concatenated sentences.

[0008] A program of the present invention is a program for causing a computer to operate as the above-described proofreading support device, and is a program for causing the computer to function as each unit included in the proofreading support device. [Effects of the Invention]

[0009] According to the present invention, there is a low risk of overlooking spelling variations, and it is possible to prevent the time required for proofreading from increasing even for long sentences. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0010] [Figure 1] 2A to 2C are diagrams illustrating processing performed by a calibration support device 10 according to an embodiment. [Figure 2] 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a calibration support device 10 according to an embodiment. [Figure 3] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of list information 120 according to an embodiment. [Figure 4] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of list information 120 according to an embodiment. [Figure 5]FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of list information 120 according to an embodiment. [Figure 6] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of list information 120 according to an embodiment. [Figure 7] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of list information 120 according to an embodiment. [Figure 8] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of list information 120 according to an embodiment. [Figure 9] 1 is a flowchart showing the flow of processing performed by a calibration support device 10 according to an embodiment. [Figure 10A] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a process for extracting spelling variation candidates. [Figure 10B] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a process for extracting spelling variation candidates. [Figure 10C] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a process for extracting spelling variation candidates. [Figure 10D] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a process for extracting spelling variation candidates. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0011] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0012] First, a method for extracting spelling variation candidates from a sentence will be described. Figures 10A to 10D are diagrams for explaining the process of extracting spelling variation candidates.

[0013] An example of a sentence is shown in Figure 10A. As shown in the example of Figure 10A, a case where spelling variation candidates are extracted from the sentence "There is handling available. There is handling available. There is no handling available, right?" will be explained.

[0014] Figure 10B shows an example of a sentence divided into words (morphemes). As shown in the example of Figure 10B, when the sentence in Figure 10A is divided into words, it becomes, for example, "There is / are / something / to handle. There is / something / to handle. There is / something / to handle. There is / something / not / to handle." Here, " / " is a symbol indicating a division.

[0015] The process of extracting spelling variation candidates will be explained using Figures 10C and 10D. Figure 10C shows the process of extracting spelling variation candidates. Figure 10D shows an example of a list used for evaluation in Figure 10C.

[0016] The table in Figure 10C shows items such as words, the number of words registered in the list, evaluation results, and whether or not the word is registered in the list. The words are listed in order of the words contained in the sentence. The number of words registered in the list shows the number of words registered in the list. The list is a list used when evaluating words contained in a sentence, as shown in the example of Figure 10D. Evaluation here means determining whether the words contained in the sentence match or are similar to the words listed in the list.

[0017] The evaluation results show the results of evaluating the words contained in the sentence. The evaluation results here show the results of determining whether the words contained in the sentence match (or are similar to) the words registered in the list.

[0018] The presence or absence of list registration indicates whether a word contained in a sentence has been registered in the list. Here, if it is determined based on the evaluation result that the word contained in the sentence does not match (or is not similar to) the word registered in the list, the word contained in the sentence is registered in the list.

[0019] The table in FIG. 10D shows items such as list number, word, element 1, element 2, etc. The list number is identification information such as a number that uniquely identifies a word registered in the list. The word indicates the word identified by the list number. The element indicates a word determined to be similar to the word identified by the list number.

[0020] First, evaluation begins with no words registered in the list. That is, it is determined whether the word "handle" shown at the top of the table in FIG. 10C matches or is similar to a word registered in the list. At this point, no words are registered in the list. Therefore, the evaluation result for the word "handle" is "no match or similar." Words for which the evaluation result is "no match or similar" are registered in the list. In the example of FIG. 10C, the word "handle" is registered in No. 1 of the list. Then, in the example of FIG. 10D, the word "handle" is registered in No. 1 of the list.

[0021] Next, it is determined whether the word "ga" matches or is similar to the words registered in the list. Since only the word "handle" is registered in the list, the evaluation result for the word "ga" is "no match or similar." Words for which the evaluation result is "no match or similar" are registered in the list. In the example of FIG. 10C, the word "ga" is registered in No. 2 of the list. And, in the example of FIG. 10D, the word "ga" is registered in No. 2 of the list.

[0022] Next, it is determined whether the word "ari" matches or is similar to the words registered in the list. Only the words "handle" and "ga" are registered in the list. Therefore, the evaluation result for the word "ari" is "no match or similar." Words for which the evaluation result is "no match or similar" are registered in the list. In the example of FIG. 10C, the word "ari" is registered in No. 3 of the list. And, in the example of FIG. 10D, the word "ari" is registered in No. 3 of the list.

[0023] Next, it is determined whether the word "masu" matches or is similar to the words registered in the list. Only the words "handle," "ga," and "ari" are registered in the list. Therefore, the evaluation result for the word "masu" is "no match or similar." Words for which the evaluation result is "no match or similar" are registered in the list. In the example of Figure 10C, the word "masu" is registered in No. 4 of the list. And, in an example of the list of Figure 10D, the word "masu" is registered in No. 4.

[0024] Next, it is determined whether the word "." matches or is similar to the words registered in the list. Only the words "handle," "ga," "ari," and "masu" are registered in the list. Therefore, the evaluation result for the word "." is "no match or similar." Words that are evaluated as "no match or similar" are registered in the list. The example in Figure 10C shows that the word "." is registered in No. 5 in the list. And an example in Figure 10D shows that the word "." is registered in No. 5 in the list.

[0025] Next, it is determined whether the word "handle" matches or is similar to a word registered in the list. Only the words "handle," "ga," "ari," "masu," and "." are registered in the list. Therefore, the evaluation result for the word "handle" is "match No. 1." Words that are evaluated as "matching" are not newly registered in the list.

[0026] Next, it is determined whether the word "ha" matches or is similar to the words registered in the list. Only the words "handle", "ga", "ari", "masu", and "." are registered in the list. Therefore, the evaluation result for the word "ha" is "no match or similar". Words for which the evaluation result is "no match or similar" are registered in the list. In the example of Figure 10C, the word "ha" is registered in No. 6 of the list. And, in the example of Figure 10D, the word "ha" is registered in No. 6 of the list.

[0027] Next, it is determined whether the word "ari" matches or is similar to a word registered in the list. The list currently contains the words "handle," "ga," "ari," "masu," ".", and "wa." Therefore, the word "ari" is evaluated as being "similar" to "ari" in list No. 3. Words that are evaluated as being "similar" are not newly registered in the list. Words that are evaluated as being "similar" are added to the elements of the words that are determined to be similar. Here, an example is shown in which the word "ari" has been added to element 1 of list No. 3 in Figure 10D.

[0028] Note that whether words are similar to each other may be determined arbitrarily. For example, consider a case where the proofreading support device 10 extracts candidates for spelling variations, and the user decides whether to proofread them to achieve a unified spelling. In this case, it is preferable that the words to be proofread as spelling variations in a sentence be determined to be "similar."

[0029] For example, in the sentence in FIG. 10A, it is preferable that "handowari", "handowari", and "handowari" are determined to be similar words. This is because, when the sentence contains a mixture of "handowari", "handowari", and "handowari", a proofreader would normally determine these as spelling variations and would proofread the sentence to unify them into one of the spellings. Also, it is preferable that "ari" and "ari" are determined to be similar words. This is because, when the sentence contains a mixture of "ari" and "ari", a proofreader would normally determine these as spelling variations and would proofread the sentence to unify them into one of the spellings.

[0030] Note that the example in FIG. 10C illustrates a case where "ari" and "nai" are determined to be dissimilar words. However, this is not limiting. "ari" and "nai" may also be determined to be similar words. For example, when "ari" and "nai" are mixed in a sentence, and the proofreader may determine that the spellings of "ari" and "nai" are variations in spelling and may proofread the sentence to unify them into one spelling, the proofreading support device 10 is programmed to determine that "ari" and "nai" are similar words.

[0031] As shown in the example of Figure 10C, in extracting spelling variations, words in a sentence are evaluated in order. Then, based on the evaluation results, words are registered in a list. When evaluating a word in a sentence, it must be compared with all the words registered in the list. For this reason, the time required for evaluation increases depending on the number of words registered in the list. For example, as shown in the "Number of words registered in list" item in Figure 10C, the number of words ultimately registered in the list for the sentence shown in the example of Figure 10A is "9."

[0032] If the sentence is short and the number of extracted words is small, the evaluation does not take much time. However, if the sentence is long and the number of extracted words is large, the evaluation takes a huge amount of time, making it unrealistic.

[0033] To address this issue, in this embodiment, the sentence is divided. By dividing the sentence, the sentence becomes shorter, which makes it possible to reduce the time required for evaluation. However, simply evaluating the divided sentences does not allow consistency of spelling variations throughout the entire sentence. For example, when a sentence is divided into two, there may be a case where the word "handling" is written without spelling variations in the first half of the sentence, and the word "handling" is written without spelling variations in the second half of the sentence. In this case, there is no spelling variation in the two divided sentences. However, there is spelling variation between "handling" and "handling" throughout the entire sentence. There is a risk that spelling variations will be overlooked if only the divided sentences are evaluated.

[0034] To address this issue, in this embodiment, the divided sentences are concatenated and the concatenated sentence is evaluated. This ensures that the spelling variations in the concatenated sentence are consistent. Furthermore, by performing a round-robin approach to combinations of concatenated sentences, the spelling variations in the entire sentence are consistent.

[0035] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating the processing performed by a proofreading support device 10 according to an embodiment. Target sentence ABCD is shown at the top of FIG. 1. Target sentence ABCD is the sentence to be proofread. In the example of this figure, the sentence containing the words "There is a way to handle it. There is a way to handle it. There is a way to handle it. There is no way to handle it." is taken as target sentence ABCD.

[0036] First, the proofreading support device 10 generates divided sentences by dividing the target sentence. In the example of this figure, an example is shown in which the target sentence ABCD is divided into four divided sentences A to D.

[0037] Next, the proofreading support device 10 generates concatenated sentences by concatenating the segmented sentences. In the example shown in this figure, concatenated sentences AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, and CD are generated by concatenating two different segmented sentences from segmented sentences A to D.

[0038] The proofreading support device 10 then evaluates each of the concatenated sentences AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, and CD, and generates a list (list information 120, described later) for each. If there is a word that is registered twice in each list, the proofreading support device 10 merges the word and its element group. The list after the merger matches the list that would be generated if the entire sentence were evaluated.

[0039] Here, the proofreading support device 10 may process the evaluation of each of the concatenated sentences AB, AC, AD, BC, BD, and CD in parallel. For example, the proofreading support device 10 processes the evaluation of each concatenated sentence in parallel. In this case, the number of evaluations corresponding to the number of divisions is processed in parallel. By increasing the number of divisions, it is possible to shorten the time required for evaluation. On the other hand, it is conceivable that the total number of calculations will increase compared to when the entire sentence is evaluated. However, due to recent improvements in computer performance, the impact of an increase in the total number of calculations on processing time is not that great. In other words, even if the total amount of calculations increases, the effect of shortening processing time by processing in parallel is significant. Therefore, even for long sentences, the time required for proofreading is not increased.

[0040] The proofreading support device 10 may arbitrarily decide how many divided sentences to divide the target sentence into. Considering the possibility of concatenation, it would be meaningless to divide the target sentence into two sentences and then concatenate the two divided sentences. Therefore, the proofreading support device 10 should divide the target sentence into at least three or more sentences.

[0041] 2 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a proofreading support device 10 according to an embodiment. The proofreading support device 10 is a computer device that extracts character strings that are candidates for spelling variations in a sentence to be proofread (target sentence). As the proofreading support device 10, for example, a server device, a cloud, a PC (Personal Computer), etc. can be applied.

[0042] The proofreading support device 10 includes, for example, a communication unit 11, a storage unit 12, and a control unit 13. The communication unit 11 communicates with an external device via a communication network or the like. The communication unit 11 receives text information indicating a target sentence from, for example, an external server device. The communication unit 11 also transmits character strings that are candidates for spelling variations extracted from the target sentence as proofreading results to the external server device or the like.

[0043] The storage unit 12 is configured by a storage medium such as a hard disk drive (HDD), flash memory, electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), random access read / write memory (RAM), or read-only memory (ROM), or a combination of these. The storage unit 12 stores programs for executing various processes of the proofreading support device 10, as well as temporary data used when performing the various processes. The storage unit 12 stores, for example, list information 120. The list information 120 is information about orthographic variation candidates extracted from the target sentence.

[0044] The control unit 13 is realized by causing a CPU (Central Processing Unit) provided as hardware in the proofreading support device 10 to execute a program. The control unit 13 comprehensively controls the proofreading support device 10. The control unit 13 includes, for example, an acquisition unit 130, a division unit 131, a connection unit 132, an evaluation unit 133, and a device control unit 134.

[0045] The acquisition unit 130 acquires the target sentence. For example, the acquisition unit 130 acquires information indicating the target sentence from an external server device or the like via the communication unit 11. The acquisition unit 130 outputs the acquired information indicating the target sentence to the division unit 131.

[0046] The division unit 131 generates divided sentences based on the target sentence. For example, the division unit 131 generates divided sentences so that the number of words included in each divided sentence is approximately the same. In this case, the division unit 131 divides the target sentence into words and calculates the number of words written in the target sentence. The division unit 131 searches for a boundary that divides the target sentence by searching for character strings before and after the description that corresponds to the number of words obtained by dividing the calculated number of words by the division number.

[0047] The dividing unit 131 uses, for example, periods, symbols, commas, etc. as boundaries for dividing the target sentence. Examples of symbols include an exclamation mark "!", a question mark "?", a musical note "♪", and a colon ":". Periods, symbols, commas, etc. are used as boundaries because they are less likely to be the subject of spelling variations. The dividing unit 131 at least avoids setting boundaries in the middle of words. For example, if a boundary is set between "tori" and "i" in the word "tori", what was originally the word "tori" in the previous divided sentence may be evaluated as the word "tori", which could result in an incorrect evaluation.

[0048] The division unit 131 determines boundaries for dividing the target sentence, and generates a plurality of divided sentences by dividing the target sentence at the determined boundaries. The division unit 131 outputs information indicating the generated divided sentences to the concatenation unit 132.

[0049] The concatenation unit 132 generates a concatenated sentence. For example, the concatenation unit 132 generates all possible patterns of combinations of two different divided sentences as concatenated sentences. The concatenation unit 132 outputs information indicating the generated concatenated sentence to the evaluation unit 133.

[0050] The evaluation unit 133 evaluates each concatenated sentence. For example, the evaluation unit 133 divides the concatenated sentence into words and determines, in order, whether each divided word matches or is similar to a word registered in the list (list information 120). If a word neither matches nor is similar to a word registered in the list, the evaluation unit 133 registers the word in the list. If a word is similar to a word registered in the list, the evaluation unit 133 adds the word to the list as an element of the words (similar words) registered in the list.

[0051] The device control unit 134 exercises overall control over the proofreading support device 10. For example, the device control unit 134 outputs text information indicating the target sentence received by the communication unit 11 to the acquisition unit 130. The device control unit 134 merges the list (list information 120) generated as a result of the evaluation by the evaluation unit 133. The device control unit 134 transmits the merged list to an external server device as a list indicating candidates for spelling variations.

[0052] 3 to 8 are diagrams showing examples of list information 120 according to an embodiment. 3 to 8 show items such as list No., word, element 1, element 2, etc. These items are similar to the items shown in the table of FIG. 10D, and therefore a description thereof will be omitted.

[0053] 3 shows an example of a list generated in response to concatenated sentence AB as list information 120A. List information 120A shows an example in which the word "ari" written at the 6th and 7th characters and the word "ari" written at the 16th and 17th characters in concatenated sentence AB are extracted as candidates for spelling variations.

[0054] 4 shows an example of a list generated in response to concatenated sentence AC as list information 120B. List information 120B shows an example in which the word "(hanari)" written at the 1st to 4th characters and the word "(hanari)" written at the 21st to 23rd characters in concatenated sentence AC are extracted as candidates for spelling variations.

[0055] 5 shows an example of a list generated in response to concatenated sentences AD as list information 120C. List information 120C shows an example in which the word "(kanri)" written at the 1st to 4th characters and the word "(kanri)" written at the 30th to 31st characters in concatenated sentences AD are extracted as candidates for spelling variations.

[0056] 6 shows an example of a list generated for concatenated sentence BC as list information 120D. List information 120D shows an example in which the word "(tsukairi)" written at the 11th-14th characters and the word "(tsukairi)" written at the 21st-23rd characters in concatenated sentence BC are extracted as spelling variation candidates. List information 120D also shows an example in which the word "(ari)" written at the 16th-17th characters and the word "(ari)" written at the 25th-26th characters in concatenated sentence BC are extracted as spelling variation candidates.

[0057] 7 shows an example of a list generated in response to concatenated sentence BD as list information 120E. List information 120E shows an example in which the word "(kanri)" written at the 11th to 14th characters and the word "(kanri)" written at the 30th to 31st characters in concatenated sentence BD are extracted as candidates for spelling variations.

[0058] 8 shows an example of a list generated in response to a concatenated sentence CD as list information 120F. List information 120F shows an example in which the word "(hankoukai)" written at the 21st and 23rd characters and the word "(hankoukai)" written at the 30th and 31st characters in the concatenated sentence CD are extracted as candidates for spelling variations.

[0059] Here, we will explain how the device control unit 134 merges lists (list information 120). First, the device control unit 134 identifies the positions where words that are candidates for spelling variations shown in each list are written, and merges those where the identified positions overlap.

[0060] For example, when list information 120A to 120F as shown in Figures 3 to 8 are generated, the device control unit 134 identifies the positions where words are written in each list for the spelling variations ``ari'' and ``ari'' in list information 120A and the spelling variations ``ari'' and ``ari'' in list information 120D.

[0061] In list information 120A, the word "yes" is written at the 6th and 7th characters. In list information 120A, the word "yes" is written at the 16th and 17th characters. In list information 120D, the word "yes" is written at the 16th and 17th characters. In list information 120D, the word "yes" is written at the 25th and 26th characters.

[0062] The positions where the word "ari" is written in each list overlap at the 17th and 18th characters. In this case, the device control unit 134 considers the spelling variations of "ari" and "ari" in list information 120A and the spelling variations of "ari" and "ari" in list information 120D to be in the same group and merges them. As a result, the "ari" at the 7th and 8th characters, the "ari" at the 16th and 17th characters, and the "ari" at the 25th and 26th characters become candidates for spelling variations in the target sentence.

[0063] In addition, the device control unit 134 identifies the positions where words are written in each list for the spelling variations between "handling" and "handling" in list information 120B, the spelling variations between "handling" and "handling" in list information 120C, the spelling variations between "handling" and "handling" in list information 120D, the spelling variations between "handling" and "handling" in list information 120E, and the spelling variations between "handling" and "handling" in list information 120F.

[0064] The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120B is the 1st to 4th characters. The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120B is the 21st to 23rd characters. The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120C is the 1st to 4th characters. The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120C is the 30th to 31st characters.

[0065] The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120D is the 11th to 14th characters. The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120D is the 21st to 23rd characters. The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120E is the 11th to 14th characters. The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120E is the 30th to 31st characters.

[0066] The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120F is the 21st to 23rd characters. The position where the word "handling" is described in list information 120F is the 30th to 31st characters.

[0067] The device control unit 134 merges those where the positions where the word "handling" is described in each list overlap at the 1st to 4th characters. The device control unit 134 regards and merges the notation variations of "handling" and "handling" in list information 120B, and the notation variations of "handling" and "handling" in list information 120C as the same group. As a result, "handling" at the 1st to 4th characters, "handling" at the 21st to 23rd characters, and "handling" at the 30th to 31st characters become candidates for notation variations in the target text.

[0068] In addition, the device control unit 134 merges those where the positions where the word "handling" is described in each list overlap at the 21st to 23rd characters. The device control unit 134 regards the variations in the notations of "handling" and "handling" in the list information 120B, the variations in the notations of "handling" and "handling" in the list information 120D, and the variations in the notations of "handling" and "handling" in the list information 120F as the same group and merges them. As a result, "handling" at the 1st to 4th characters, "handling" at the 11th to 14th characters, "handling" at the 21st to 23rd characters, and "handling" at the 30th to 31st characters become candidates for notation variations in the target text.

[0069] In addition, the device control unit 134 merges those where the positions where the word "handling" is described in each list overlap at the 11th to 14th characters. The device control unit 134 regards the variations in the notations of "handling" and "handling" in the list information 120D and the variations in the notations of "handling" and "handling" in the list information 120E as the same group and merges them. As a result, "handling" at the 11th to 14th characters, "handling" at the 21st to 23rd characters, and "handling" at the 30th to 31st characters become candidates for notation variations in the target text.

[0070] As described above, a list (first list) of candidates for notation variations in the target text is generated, where the 1st to 4th characters "handling", the 21st to 23rd characters "handling", and the 30th to 31st characters "handling" are candidates. Also, a list (second list) of candidates for notation variations in the target text is generated, where the 1st to 4th characters "handling", the 11th to 14th characters "handling", the 21st to 23rd characters "handling", and the 30th to 31st characters "handling" are candidates. A list (third list) of candidates for notation variations in the target text is generated, where the 11th to 14th characters "handling", the 21st to 23rd characters "handling", and the 30th to 31st characters "handling" are candidates. In this case, the elements of each of the first list to the third list overlap with each other. In this case, the device control unit 134 merges the first list to the third list into one list. As a result, the 1st to 4th characters "handling", the 11th to 14th characters "handling", the 21st to 23rd characters "handling", and the 30th to 31st characters "handling" become candidates for notation variations in the target text.

[0071] FIG. 9 is a flowchart showing the flow of processing performed by the calibration support device 10 according to the embodiment. The calibration support device 10 acquires a calibration target (target text) (step S10), divides the acquired target text (step S11), and generates divided texts. The calibration support device 10 concatenates the divided texts (step S12) to generate a concatenated text. The calibration support device 10 acquires the concatenated text (step S13), and extracts candidates for notation variations in the concatenated text by evaluating the acquired concatenated text (step S14). The calibration support device 10 determines whether evaluation has been performed for all the concatenated texts (step S15), and returns to step S13 if there is a concatenated text that has not yet been evaluated. When evaluation has been performed for all the concatenated texts, the calibration support device 10 merges the words registered repeatedly in the list (list information 120) generated along with the evaluation (step S16). The calibration support device 10 transmits the merged list as a result of extracting candidates for notation variations, for example, to an external server device.

[0072] As described above, the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment includes an acquisition unit 130, a division unit 131, a concatenation unit 132, and an evaluation unit 133. The acquisition unit 130 acquires a target sentence. The division unit 131 generates divided sentences by dividing the target sentence into at least three or more segments. The concatenation unit 132 generates a concatenated sentence by concatenating different segments from the segments, the concatenated sentence being shorter than the target sentence. The evaluation unit 133 extracts character strings that are candidates for spelling variations in the concatenated sentence. This allows the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment to extract character strings that are candidates for spelling variations in a concatenated sentence that is shorter than the target sentence. Therefore, even if the target sentence is long, a concatenated sentence that is shorter than the target sentence can be proofread. Therefore, even if the target sentence is long, it is possible to extract character strings that are candidates for spelling variations without increasing the time required for proofreading.

[0073] Furthermore, in the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment, the evaluation unit 133 compares a target word included in a concatenated sentence with registered words registered in list information 120, which lists words for which the presence or absence of spelling variations is to be determined. If the target word does not match or is not similar to a registered word, the evaluation unit 133 registers the target word in the list information 120. If the target word is similar to a registered word, the evaluation unit 133 adds the target word to an element of the registered word similar to the target word in the list information 120. Of the registered words registered in the list information 120, the evaluation unit 133 regards the registered word and words added to the element of the registered word as spelling variation candidates. This makes it possible for the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment to extract spelling variation candidates by a simple method of comparing a target word included in a concatenated sentence with the list information 120, registering the target word if it does not match or is similar, and adding the target word to an element if it is similar.

[0074] The proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment further includes a device control unit 134. Based on the list information 120 generated corresponding to each linked sentence, the device control unit 134 merges registered words that are registered in multiple list information 120, among the registered words registered in each list information 120. As a result, the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment can extract spelling variations in the target sentence without duplication, based on the list information 120 of each linked sentence.

[0075] Let us now consider a comparative example. One possible measure to shorten the time required for evaluation is to prepare a list of words that are likely to have spelling variations and check only the words registered on the list for spelling variations, thereby speeding up proofreading. However, this method does not allow checking for spelling variations in words that are not registered on the list in advance. As a result, there is a possibility that spelling variations may be overlooked.

[0076] In contrast, in this embodiment, list information 120 corresponding to a concatenated sentence is generated. The list information 120 is generated depending on whether the words written in the concatenated sentence match or are similar to other words. Therefore, the corresponding concatenated sentence is generated. Therefore, it is possible to reduce the possibility of overlooking a spelling variation and reduce the risk of overlooking a spelling variation.

[0077] Furthermore, in the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment, the concatenation unit 132 generates concatenated sentences corresponding to all combinations of two different divided sentences. As a result, in the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment, even if a unified spelling in one divided sentence corresponds to a spelling variation in the other divided sentence, it is possible to extract the spelling variations between the two divided sentences, thereby reducing the risk of overlooking a spelling variation.

[0078] Furthermore, in the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment, the evaluation unit 133 executes the process of extracting character strings that are candidates for spelling variations in parallel for each concatenated sentence, thereby enabling the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment to reduce the time required for evaluation.

[0079] Furthermore, in the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment, the dividing unit 131 divides the target sentence using any of a period, a symbol, or a comma in the target sentence as a boundary. As a result, in the proofreading support device 10 of the embodiment, boundaries are not set in the middle of words, and it is possible to reduce the risk of overlooking spelling variations.

[0080] All or part of the calibration support device 10 in the above-described embodiment may be implemented by a computer. In this case, a program for implementing the functions may be recorded on a computer-readable recording medium, and the program may be loaded into a computer system and executed. Note that the term "computer system" as used herein includes hardware such as an OS and peripheral devices. Furthermore, the term "computer-readable recording medium" refers to portable media such as flexible disks, optical magnetic disks, ROMs, and CD-ROMs, as well as storage devices such as hard disks built into a computer system. Furthermore, the term "computer-readable recording medium" may also include devices that dynamically store programs for a short period of time, such as communication lines used when transmitting programs via networks such as the Internet or telephone lines, or devices that store programs for a fixed period of time, such as volatile memory within a computer system that serves as a server or client. The program may be designed to implement some of the functions described above, or may be capable of implementing the functions in combination with a program already stored in the computer system, or may be implemented using a programmable logic device such as an FPGA.

[0081] Although an embodiment of the present invention has been described above in detail with reference to the drawings, the specific configuration is not limited to this embodiment, and includes designs within the scope of the gist of the present invention. [Explanation of symbols]

[0082] 10...Calibration support device 130…Acquisition Department 131...Divided part 132...Connection part 133...Evaluation Department

Claims

1. an acquisition unit that acquires a target sentence to be proofread; a division unit that divides the target sentence into at least three or more divided sentences; a concatenation unit that generates a concatenated sentence that is formed by concatenating different divided sentences from among the divided sentences and that is shorter than the target sentence; an evaluation unit that extracts character strings that are candidates for spelling variations in the concatenated sentence; A calibration support device comprising:

2. The evaluation unit comparing the target word included in the concatenated sentence with registered words registered in list information indicating a list of words for which spelling variations are to be determined; If the target word does not match or is not similar to the registered word, register the target word in the list information; If the target word is similar to the registered word, add the target word to an element of the registered word similar to the target word in the list information. The calibration support device according to claim 1 .

3. the evaluation unit determines, among the registered words registered in the list information, the registered words and words added to the elements of the registered words as candidates for spelling variations; The calibration support device according to claim 2 .

4. and a device control unit that merges, based on the list information generated corresponding to each of the linked sentences, registered words that are registered in multiple pieces of list information, among the registered words registered in each piece of list information. The calibration support device according to claim 3 .

5. the concatenation unit generates the concatenated sentences corresponding to all combinations of the two mutually different divided sentences. The calibration support device according to any one of claims 1 to 4.

6. the evaluation unit executes in parallel a process of extracting character strings that are candidates for spelling variations for each of the concatenated sentences; The calibration support device according to any one of claims 1 to 5.

7. the dividing unit divides the target sentence using any one of a period, a symbol, or a comma in the target sentence as a boundary; The calibration support device according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

8. A proofreading support method performed by a computer The acquisition unit acquires a target text to be proofread, a division unit that divides the target sentence into at least three or more divided sentences; a concatenation unit that concatenates different segments of the segmented sentences to generate a concatenated sentence that is shorter than the target sentence; an evaluation unit extracting character strings that are candidates for spelling variations from the concatenated sentence; Calibration support method.

9. A program for causing a computer to operate as the calibration support device according to any one of claims 1 to 7, the program causing the computer to function as each unit included in the calibration support device.

Images