  Real-word spelling correction differs from non-word spelling correction in
its aims and its challenges. Here we show that the central problem in real-word
spelling correction is detection. Methods from non-word spelling correction,
which focus instead on selection among candidate corrections, do not address
detection adequately, because detection is either assumed in advance or heavily
constrained. As we demonstrate in this paper, merely discriminating between the
intended word and a random close variation of it within the context of a
sentence is a task that can be performed with high accuracy using
straightforward models. Trigram models are sufficient in almost all cases. The
difficulty comes when every word in the sentence is a potential error, with a
large set of possible candidate corrections. Despite their strengths, trigram
models cannot reliably find true errors without introducing many more, at least
not when used in the obvious sequential way without added structure. The
detection task exposes weakness not visible in the selection task.
