mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Searching for a higher power in the human evaluation of MT

arXiv 2210.11612 ↗First posted 20 Oct 2022stat.AP cs.CLcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In MT evaluation, pairwise comparisons are conducted to identify the better system. In conducting the comparison, the experimenter must allocate a budget to collect Direct Assessment (DA) judgments. We provide a cost effective way to spend the budget, but show that typical budget sizes often do not allow for solid comparison. Taking the perspective that the basis of solid comparison is in achieving statistical significance, we study the power (rate of achieving significance) on a large collection of pairwise DA comparisons. Due to the nature of statistical estimation, power is low for differentiating less than 1-2 DA points, and to achieve a notable increase in power requires at least 2-3x more samples. Applying variance reduction alone will not yield these gains, so we must face the reality of undetectable differences and spending increases. In this context, we propose interim testing, an "early stopping" collection procedure that yields more power per judgment collected, which adaptively focuses the budget on pairs that are borderline significant. Interim testing can achieve up to a 27% efficiency gain when spending 3x the current budget, or 18% savings at the current evaluation power.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Oct 2022.

Builds on

14 of 43 references.

References · 14

  1. 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 338
  2. 2017Survey of the State of the Art in Natural Language Generation: Core tasks, applications and evaluationcited by 206
  3. 2021To Ship or Not to Ship: An Extensive Evaluation of Automatic Metrics for Machine Translationcited by 163
  4. 2020Tangled up in BLEU: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation Metricscited by 158
  5. 2020With Little Power Comes Great Responsibilitycited by 142
  6. 2018Achieving Human Parity on Automatic Chinese to English News Translationcited by 119
  7. 2018Has Machine Translation Achieved Human Parity? A Case for Document-level Evaluationcited by 88
  8. 2018The price of debiasing automatic metrics in natural language evaluationcited by 60
  9. 2018Attaining the Unattainable? Reassessing Claims of Human Parity in Neural Machine Translationcited by 58
  10. 2020A Set of Recommendations for Assessing Human-Machine Parity in Language Translationcited by 34
  11. 2015Always Valid Inference: Bringing Sequential Analysis to A/B Testingcited by 20
  12. 2021The statistical advantage of automatic NLG metrics at the system levelcited by 18
2 more
  1. 2022Toward More Effective Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 10
  2. 2021Online Learning Meets Machine Translation Evaluation: Finding the Best Systems with the Least Human Effortcited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3.

3 papers.