mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Quantifying the Plausibility of Context Reliance in Neural Machine Translation

arXiv 2310.01188 ↗First posted 2 Oct 2023cs.CL cs.AI cs.HCcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Establishing whether language models can use contextual information in a human-plausible way is important to ensure their trustworthiness in real-world settings. However, the questions of when and which parts of the context affect model generations are typically tackled separately, with current plausibility evaluations being practically limited to a handful of artificial benchmarks. To address this, we introduce Plausibility Evaluation of Context Reliance (PECoRe), an end-to-end interpretability framework designed to quantify context usage in language models' generations. Our approach leverages model internals to (i) contrastively identify context-sensitive target tokens in generated texts and (ii) link them to contextual cues justifying their prediction. We use pecore to quantify the plausibility of context-aware machine translation models, comparing model rationales with human annotations across several discourse-level phenomena. Finally, we apply our method to unannotated model translations to identify context-mediated predictions and highlight instances of (im)plausible context usage throughout generation.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 60 of its 79 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Oct 2023.

Builds on

60 of 79 references.

References · 60

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  3. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  4. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
  5. 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,371
  6. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
  7. 2018A Call for Clarity in Reporting BLEU Scorescited by 1,799
  8. 2021Improving language models by retrieving from trillions of tokenscited by 1,293
  9. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 929
  10. 2020On Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 900
  11. 2019Right for the Wrong Reasons: Diagnosing Syntactic Heuristics in Natural Language Inferencecited by 876
  12. 2023Large Language Models Can Be Easily Distracted by Irrelevant Contextcited by 841
38 more
  1. 2020Quantifying Attention Flow in Transformerscited by 775
  2. 2019Attention is not not Explanationcited by 636
  3. 2020Language-agnostic BERT Sentence Embeddingcited by 627
  4. 2023Eliciting Latent Predictions from Transformers with the Tuned Lenscited by 623
  5. 2020Towards Faithfully Interpretable NLP Systems: How should we define and evaluate faithfulness?cited by 599
  6. 2019Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarizationcited by 584
  7. 2019BLiMP: The Benchmark of Linguistic Minimal Pairs for Englishcited by 564
  8. 2021The FLORES-101 Evaluation Benchmark for Low-Resource and Multilingual Machine Translationcited by 560
  9. 2022Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Build Predictions by Promoting Concepts in the Vocabulary Spacecited by 532
  10. 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 530
  11. 2020FEQA: A Question Answering Evaluation Framework for Faithfulness Assessment in Abstractive Summarizationcited by 293
  12. 2021Surface Form Competition: Why the Highest Probability Answer Isn't Always Rightcited by 263
  13. 2019Evaluating Gender Bias in Machine Translationcited by 249
  14. 2021Word Alignment by Fine-tuning Embeddings on Parallel Corporacited by 186
  15. 2020A Diagnostic Study of Explainability Techniques for Text Classificationcited by 159
  16. 2021Post-hoc Interpretability for Neural NLP: A Surveycited by 156
  17. 2021Annotating and Modeling Fine-grained Factuality in Summarizationcited by 131
  18. 2020The elephant in the interpretability room: Why use attention as explanation when we have saliency methods?cited by 122
  19. 2018Context-Aware Neural Machine Translation Learns Anaphora Resolutioncited by 97
  20. 2017Neural Machine Translation with Extended Contextcited by 95
  21. 2022Interpreting Language Models with Contrastive Explanationscited by 92
  22. 2018Has Machine Translation Achieved Human Parity? A Case for Document-level Evaluationcited by 88
  23. 2017Evaluating Discourse Phenomena in Neural Machine Translationcited by 87
  24. 2023Inseq: An Interpretability Toolkit for Sequence Generation Modelscited by 78
  25. 2022Detecting and Mitigating Hallucinations in Machine Translation: Model Internal Workings Alone Do Well, Sentence Similarity Even Bettercited by 75
  26. 2019An Evaluation of the Human-Interpretability of Explanationcited by 71
  27. 2020Analyzing the Source and Target Contributions to Predictions in Neural Machine Translationcited by 71
  28. 2021"Will You Find These Shortcuts?" A Protocol for Evaluating the Faithfulness of Input Salience Methods for Text Classificationcited by 66
  29. 2022Measuring the Mixing of Contextual Information in the Transformercited by 65
  30. 2018Attaining the Unattainable? Reassessing Claims of Human Parity in Neural Machine Translationcited by 58
  31. 2022Quality-Aware Decoding for Neural Machine Translationcited by 49
  32. 2021Measuring and Increasing Context Usage in Context-Aware Machine Translationcited by 48
  33. 2019When and Why is Document-level Context Useful in Neural Machine Translation?cited by 45
  34. 2022Towards Opening the Black Box of Neural Machine Translation: Source and Target Interpretations of the Transformercited by 45
  35. 2023Quantifying Context Mixing in Transformerscited by 43
  36. 2023Explaining How Transformers Use Context to Build Predictionscited by 43
  37. 2019Context-Aware Monolingual Repair for Neural Machine Translationcited by 41
  38. 2021When Does Translation Require Context? A Data-driven, Multilingual Explorationcited by 36

50 most cited of 60 All 60 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

7 papers.