mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Towards Explainable Evaluation Metrics for Machine Translation

arXiv 2306.13041 ↗First posted 22 Jun 2023cs.CL cs.CY cs.LGcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Unlike classical lexical overlap metrics such as BLEU, most current evaluation metrics for machine translation (for example, COMET or BERTScore) are based on black-box large language models. They often achieve strong correlations with human judgments, but recent research indicates that the lower-quality classical metrics remain dominant, one of the potential reasons being that their decision processes are more transparent. To foster more widespread acceptance of novel high-quality metrics, explainability thus becomes crucial. In this concept paper, we identify key properties as well as key goals of explainable machine translation metrics and provide a comprehensive synthesis of recent techniques, relating them to our established goals and properties. In this context, we also discuss the latest state-of-the-art approaches to explainable metrics based on generative models such as ChatGPT and GPT4. Finally, we contribute a vision of next-generation approaches, including natural language explanations. We hope that our work can help catalyze and guide future research on explainable evaluation metrics and, mediately, also contribute to better and more transparent machine translation systems.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 108 of its 176 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Jun 2023.

Builds on

108 of 176 references.

References · 108

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  3. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
  4. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  5. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  6. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
  7. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  8. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,040
  9. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
  10. 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,155
  11. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,205
  12. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,056
38 more
  1. 2019Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AIcited by 1,543
  2. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  3. 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,201
  4. 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,196
  5. 2017Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPRcited by 1,086
  6. 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,024
  7. 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 979
  8. 2018A Survey Of Methods For Explaining Black Box Modelscited by 970
  9. 2020Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLPcited by 951
  10. 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 729
  11. 2021BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generationcited by 719
  12. 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 716
  13. 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 629
  14. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 590
  15. 2018Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learningcited by 508
  16. 2019What do you learn from context? Probing for sentence structure in contextualized word representationscited by 436
  17. 2023Is ChatGPT a Good NLG Evaluator? A Preliminary Studycited by 420
  18. 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 416
  19. 2023Large Language Models Are State-of-the-Art Evaluators of Translation Qualitycited by 416
  20. 2019MoverScore: Text Generation Evaluating with Contextualized Embeddings and Earth Mover Distancecited by 415
  21. 2019Linguistic Knowledge and Transferability of Contextual Representationscited by 382
  22. 2019Explain Yourself! Leveraging Language Models for Commonsense Reasoningcited by 367
  23. 2023GPTScore: Evaluate as You Desirecited by 357
  24. 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 333
  25. 2020Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Makingcited by 281
  26. 2020Evaluation of Text Generation: A Surveycited by 275
  27. 2021Polyjuice: Generating Counterfactuals for Explaining, Evaluating, and Improving Modelscited by 219
  28. 2020Unsupervised Quality Estimation for Neural Machine Translationcited by 210
  29. 2020A Survey of the State of Explainable AI for Natural Language Processingcited by 206
  30. 2021Trustworthy AI: From Principles to Practicescited by 206
  31. 2022CometKiwi: IST-Unbabel 2022 Submission for the Quality Estimation Shared Taskcited by 205
  32. 2017Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Understanding, Visualizing and Interpreting Deep Learning Modelscited by 202
  33. 2020Evaluating Explainable AI: Which Algorithmic Explanations Help Users Predict Model Behavior?cited by 189
  34. 2022ROSCOE: A Suite of Metrics for Scoring Step-by-Step Reasoningcited by 175
  35. 2019One Explanation Does Not Fit All: A Toolkit and Taxonomy of AI Explainability Techniquescited by 164
  36. 2020A Survey of Evaluation Metrics Used for NLG Systemscited by 164
  37. 2021Post-hoc Interpretability for Neural NLP: A Surveycited by 155
  38. 2022Repairing the Cracked Foundation: A Survey of Obstacles in Evaluation Practices for Generated Textcited by 154

50 most cited of 108 All 108 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 5; 2025: 4; 2026: 4.

15 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2023xCOMET: Transparent Machine Translation Evaluation through Fine-grained Error Detectioncited by 260
  2. 2024A Survey on Multilingual Large Language Models: Corpora, Alignment, and Biascited by 82
  3. 2023The Eval4NLP 2023 Shared Task on Prompting Large Language Models as Explainable Metricscited by 23
  4. 2024MQM-APE: Toward High-Quality Error Annotation Predictors with Automatic Post-Editing in LLM Translation Evaluatorscited by 22
  5. 2024PrExMe! Large Scale Prompt Exploration of Open Source LLMs for Machine Translation and Summarization Evaluationcited by 15
  6. 2025QE4PE: Word-level Quality Estimation for Human Post-Editingcited by 6
  7. 2025Should I Share this Translation? Evaluating Quality Feedback for User Reliance on Machine Translationcited by 5
  8. 2024PromptOptMe: Error-Aware Prompt Compression for LLM-based MT Evaluation Metricscited by 4
  9. 2025Unsupervised Word-level Quality Estimation for Machine Translation Through the Lens of Annotators (Dis)agreementcited by 4
  10. 2024What Would You Ask When You First Saw a2+b2=c2? Evaluating LLM on Curiosity-Driven Questioningcited by 1
  11. 2025CROC: Evaluating and Training T2I Metrics with Pseudo- and Human-Labeled Contrastive Robustness Checkscited by 1
  12. 2026When Consistency Does Not Mean Reliability: Evaluating Local LLM Judges Against Human Ratingscited by 1
3 more
  1. 2026Translate or Simplify First: An Analysis of Cross-lingual Text Simplification in English and Frenchcited by 0
  2. 2026ExCAM: Explainable Cultural Awareness Metricscited by 0
  3. 2026MiNER: Fine-Tuned Biomedical Natural Language Processing for Malaria Disease Entity Recognition in Clinical Textscited by 0