Has Machine Translation Evaluation Achieved Human Parity? The Human Reference and the Limits of Progress
원문 초록
In Machine Translation (MT) evaluation, metric performance is assessed based on agreement with human judgments. In recent years, automatic metrics have demonstrated increasingly high levels of agreement with humans. To gain a clearer understanding of metric performance and establish an upper bound, we incorporate human baselines in the MT meta-evaluation, that is, the assessment of MT metrics' capabilities. Our results show that human annotators are not consistently superior to automatic metrics, with state-of-the-art metrics often ranking on par with or higher than human baselines. Despite these findings suggesting human parity, we discuss several reasons for caution. Finally, we explore the broader implications of our results for the research field, asking: Can we still reliably measure improvements in MT evaluation? With this work, we aim to shed light on the limits of our ability to measure progress in the field, fostering discussion on an issue that we believe is crucial to the entire MT evaluation community.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
CycleDistill: Bootstrapping Machine Translation using LLMs with Cyclical Distillation
ConsistencyChecker: Tree-based Evaluation of LLM Generalization Capabilities
Deep Symmetric Autoencoders from the Eckart-Young-Schmidt Perspective
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
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.