mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Consistent Human Evaluation of Machine Translation across Language Pairs

arXiv 2205.08533 ↗First posted 17 May 2022cs.CLcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Obtaining meaningful quality scores for machine translation systems through human evaluation remains a challenge given the high variability between human evaluators, partly due to subjective expectations for translation quality for different language pairs. We propose a new metric called XSTS that is more focused on semantic equivalence and a cross-lingual calibration method that enables more consistent assessment. We demonstrate the effectiveness of these novel contributions in large scale evaluation studies across up to 14 language pairs, with translation both into and out of English.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 15 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 May 2022.

Builds on

6 of 15 references.

References · 6

  1. 2019fairseq: A Fast, Extensible Toolkit for Sequence Modelingcited by 1,486
  2. 2020Beyond English-Centric Multilingual Machine Translationcited by 559
  3. 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 333
  4. 2021To Ship or Not to Ship: An Extensive Evaluation of Automatic Metrics for Machine Translationcited by 161
  5. 2019The FLoRes Evaluation Datasets for Low-Resource Machine Translation: Nepali-English and Sinhala-Englishcited by 61
  6. 2021Facebook AI WMT21 News Translation Task Submissioncited by 57

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 5; 2023: 3; 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

13 papers.

Sort:

By area: