Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translation
원문 초록
Human evaluation of modern high-quality machine translation systems is a difficult problem, and there is increasing evidence that inadequate evaluation procedures can lead to erroneous conclusions. While there has been considerable research on human evaluation, the field still lacks a commonly-accepted standard procedure. As a step toward this goal, we propose an evaluation methodology grounded in explicit error analysis, based on the Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) framework. We carry out the largest MQM research study to date, scoring the outputs of top systems from the WMT 2020 shared task in two language pairs using annotations provided by professional translators with access to full document context. We analyze the resulting data extensively, finding among other results a substantially different ranking of evaluated systems from the one established by the WMT crowd workers, exhibiting a clear preference for human over machine output. Surprisingly, we also find that automatic metrics based on pre-trained embeddings can outperform human crowd workers. We make our corpus publicly available for further research.
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.