kadie@uiucdcsb.cs.uiuc.edu (01/21/88)
Remember last year's heated discussion about grammar and style checkers? Well here is a little data (some few data?). I recently had a 13 page double-spaced document proof read by a person (my advisor). He suggested about 22 simple grammar corrections; I made every correction. Then I feed the same document to RIGHTWRITER a commercial program for the IBM AT. It make 159 suggestions; I took 9 of them. The person and the program make one identical suggestion. So: * Humans are much better proofreaders than (today's) programs. * Program might still be worth using since they may find errors that a human misses and since they are convenient. Also: The most important comments a human makes are about the understandability of the document. In a sense the human is telling how well the document "executes." Since, the program only looks a syntax, it can only guess about this part. Carl Kadie Inductive Learning Group University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign UUCP: {ihnp4,pur-ee,convex}!uiucdcs!kadie CSNET: kadie@UIUC.CSNET ARPA: kadie@M.CS.UIUC.EDU (kadie@UIUC.ARPA)