Automatic Classification of Human Translation and Machine Translation: A Study from the Perspective of Lexical Diversity
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
By using a trigram model and fine-tuning a pretrained BERT model for sequence classification, we show that machine translation and human translation can be classified with an accuracy above chance level, which suggests that machine translation and human translation are different in a systematic way. The classification accuracy of machine translation is much higher than of human translation. We show that this may be explained by the difference in lexical diversity between machine translation and human translation. If machine translation has independent patterns from human translation, automatic metrics which measure the deviation of machine translation from human translation may conflate difference with quality. Our experiment with two different types of automatic metrics shows correlation with the result of the classification task. Therefore, we suggest the difference in lexical diversity between machine translation and human translation be given more attention in machine translation evaluation.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 May 2021.
Builds on
12 of 36 references.
References · 12
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
- 2016Google's Neural Machine Translation System: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Translationcited by 1,475
- 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,033
- 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 418
- 2018Achieving Human Parity on Automatic Chinese to English News Translationcited by 119
- 2018Has Machine Translation Achieved Human Parity? A Case for Document-level Evaluationcited by 88
- 2021Machine Translationese: Effects of Algorithmic Bias on Linguistic Complexity in Machine Translationcited by 70
- 2018Attaining the Unattainable? Reassessing Claims of Human Parity in Neural Machine Translationcited by 58
- 2019Lost in Translation: Loss and Decay of Linguistic Richness in Machine Translationcited by 45
- 2019Post-editese: an Exacerbated Translationesecited by 29
- 2020Reassessing Claims of Human Parity and Super-Human Performance in Machine Translation at WMT 2019cited by 20
- 2016Unsupervised Identification of Translationesecited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 2.
4 papers.
- 2025A survey of diversity quantification in natural language processing: The why, what, where and howcited by 4
- 2023Automatic Discrimination of Human and Neural Machine Translation in Multilingual Scenarioscited by 2
- 2024The Comparison of Translationese in Machine Translation and Human Transation in terms of Translation Relationscited by 1
- 2025Automatic Machine Translation Detection Using a Surrogate Multilingual Translation Modelcited by 0
- 2025Automatic Machine Translation Detection Using a Surrogate Multilingual Translation Model4 Nov 2025
- 2025A survey of diversity quantification in natural language processing: The why, what, where and how28 Jul 2025
- 2024The Comparison of Translationese in Machine Translation and Human Transation in terms of Translation Relations27 Mar 2024
- 2023Automatic Discrimination of Human and Neural Machine Translation in Multilingual Scenarios31 May 2023