mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

How sensitive are translation systems to extra contexts? Mitigating gender bias in Neural Machine Translation models through relevant contexts

arXiv 2205.10762 ↗First posted 22 May 2022cs.CL cs.LGcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Neural Machine Translation systems built on top of Transformer-based architectures are routinely improving the state-of-the-art in translation quality according to word-overlap metrics. However, a growing number of studies also highlight the inherent gender bias that these models incorporate during training, which reflects poorly in their translations. In this work, we investigate whether these models can be instructed to fix their bias during inference using targeted, guided instructions as contexts. By translating relevant contextual sentences during inference along with the input, we observe large improvements in reducing the gender bias in translations, across three popular test suites (WinoMT, BUG, SimpleGen). We further propose a novel metric to assess several large pre-trained models (OPUS-MT, M2M-100) on their sensitivity towards using contexts during translation to correct their biases. Our approach requires no fine-tuning and thus can be used easily in production systems to de-bias translations from stereotypical gender-occupation bias 1. We hope our method, along with our metric, can be used to build better, bias-free translation systems.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 May 2022.

Builds on

25 of 31 references.

References · 25

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  3. 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,234
  4. 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,312
  5. 2020Stanza: A Python Natural Language Processing Toolkit for Many Human Languagescited by 723
  6. 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolution: Evaluation and Debiasing Methodscited by 659
  7. 2020Beyond English-Centric Multilingual Machine Translationcited by 561
  8. 2019Lipstick on a Pig: Debiasing Methods Cover up Systematic Gender Biases in Word Embeddings But do not Remove Themcited by 268
  9. 2019Evaluating Gender Bias in Machine Translationcited by 249
  10. 2019Gender Bias in Contextualized Word Embeddingscited by 203
  11. 2021Word Alignment by Fine-tuning Embeddings on Parallel Corporacited by 186
  12. 2018Adversarial Removal of Demographic Attributes from Text Datacited by 170
13 more
  1. 2020Intrinsic Bias Metrics Do Not Correlate with Application Biascited by 148
  2. 2018Assessing Gender Bias in Machine Translation -- A Case Study with Google Translatecited by 121
  3. 2021Debiasing Pre-trained Contextualised Embeddingscited by 107
  4. 2019Getting Gender Right in Neural Machine Translationcited by 98
  5. 2019Equalizing Gender Biases in Neural Machine Translation with Word Embeddings Techniquescited by 65
  6. 2021Collecting a Large-Scale Gender Bias Dataset for Coreference Resolution and Machine Translationcited by 62
  7. 2021The paradox of the compositionality of natural language: a neural machine translation case studycited by 59
  8. 2020Neural Machine Translation Doesn't Translate Gender Coreference Right Unless You Make Itcited by 40
  9. 2021Gender Bias Amplification During Speed-Quality Optimization in Neural Machine Translationcited by 28
  10. 2019Fair is Better than Sensational:Man is to Doctor as Woman is to Doctorcited by 27
  11. 2021Evaluating Gender Bias in Natural Language Inferencecited by 27
  12. 2021Investigating Failures of Automatic Translation in the Case of Unambiguous Gendercited by 20
  13. 2020The Unreasonable Volatility of Neural Machine Translation Modelscited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 4; 2024: 4; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

10 papers.