A Call for Clarity in Reporting BLEU Scores
원문 초록
The field of machine translation faces an under-recognized problem because of inconsistency in the reporting of scores from its dominant metric. Although people refer to "the" BLEU score, BLEU is in fact a parameterized metric whose values can vary wildly with changes to these parameters. These parameters are often not reported or are hard to find, and consequently, BLEU scores between papers cannot be directly compared. I quantify this variation, finding differences as high as 1.8 between commonly used configurations. The main culprit is different tokenization and normalization schemes applied to the reference. Pointing to the success of the parsing community, I suggest machine translation researchers settle upon the BLEU scheme used by the annual Conference on Machine Translation (WMT), which does not allow for user-supplied reference processing, and provide a new tool, SacreBLEU, to facilitate this.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
CycleDistill: Bootstrapping Machine Translation using LLMs with Cyclical Distillation
Gender Bias in English-to-Greek Machine Translation
TACTIC: Translation Agents with Cognitive-Theoretic Interactive Collaboration
Translate With Care: Addressing Gender Bias, Neutrality, and Reasoning in Large Language Model Translations
Should I Share this Translation? Evaluating Quality Feedback for User Reliance on Machine Translation
Unsupervised Word-level Quality Estimation for Machine Translation Through the Lens of Annotators (Dis)agreement
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.