mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Evaluating Optimal Reference Translations

arXiv 2311.16787 ↗First posted 28 Nov 2023cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The overall translation quality reached by current machine translation (MT) systems for high-resourced language pairs is remarkably good. Standard methods of evaluation are not suitable nor intended to uncover the many translation errors and quality deficiencies that still persist. Furthermore, the quality of standard reference translations is commonly questioned and comparable quality levels have been reached by MT alone in several language pairs. Navigating further research in these high-resource settings is thus difficult. In this article, we propose a methodology for creating more reliable document-level human reference translations, called "optimal reference translations," with the simple aim to raise the bar of what should be deemed "human translation quality." We evaluate the obtained document-level optimal reference translations in comparison with "standard" ones, confirming a significant quality increase and also documenting the relationship between evaluation and translation editing.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Nov 2023.

Builds on

5 of 30 references.

References · 5

  1. 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 338
  2. 2018Achieving Human Parity on Automatic Chinese to English News Translationcited by 119
  3. 2021The Perils of Using Mechanical Turk to Evaluate Open-Ended Text Generationcited by 97
  4. 2022Consistent Human Evaluation of Machine Translation across Language Pairscited by 13
  5. 2019A Survey on Document-level Neural Machine Translation: Methods and Evaluationcited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2024: 1.

1 paper.