mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Machine Translation Testing via Syntactic Tree Pruning

arXiv 2401.00751 ↗First posted 1 Jan 2024cs.CL cs.SEcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Machine translation systems have been widely adopted in our daily life, making life easier and more convenient. Unfortunately, erroneous translations may result in severe consequences, such as financial losses. This requires to improve the accuracy and the reliability of machine translation systems. However, it is challenging to test machine translation systems because of the complexity and intractability of the underlying neural models. To tackle these challenges, we propose a novel metamorphic testing approach by syntactic tree pruning (STP) to validate machine translation systems. Our key insight is that a pruned sentence should have similar crucial semantics compared with the original sentence. Specifically, STP (1) proposes a core semantics-preserving pruning strategy by basic sentence structure and dependency relations on the level of syntactic tree representation; (2) generates source sentence pairs based on the metamorphic relation; (3) reports suspicious issues whose translations break the consistency property by a bag-of-words model. We further evaluate STP on two state-of-the-art machine translation systems (i.e., Google Translate and Bing Microsoft Translator) with 1,200 source sentences as inputs. The results show that STP can accurately find 5,073 unique erroneous translations in Google Translate and 5,100 unique erroneous translations in Bing Microsoft Translator (400% more than state-of-the-art techniques), with 64.5% and 65.4% precision, respectively. The reported erroneous translations vary in types and more than 90% of them cannot be found by state-of-the-art techniques. There are 9,393 erroneous translations unique to STP, which is 711.9% more than state-of-the-art techniques. Moreover, STP is quite effective to detect translation errors for the original sentences with a recall reaching 74.0%, improving state-of-the-art techniques by 55.1% on average.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 77 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jan 2024.

Builds on

32 of 77 references.

References · 32

  1. 2016Google's Neural Machine Translation System: Bridging the Gap between Human and Machine Translationcited by 1,471
  2. 2015Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networkscited by 675
  3. 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 568
  4. 2017Synthetic and Natural Noise Both Break Neural Machine Translationcited by 304
  5. 2017DeepTest: Automated Testing of Deep-Neural-Network-driven Autonomous Carscited by 249
  6. 2018Graph Convolution over Pruned Dependency Trees Improves Relation Extractioncited by 146
  7. 2018Generating 3D Adversarial Point Cloudscited by 144
  8. 2018Analyzing Uncertainty in Neural Machine Translationcited by 126
  9. 2018Guiding Deep Learning System Testing using Surprise Adequacycited by 123
  10. 2018Achieving Human Parity on Automatic Chinese to English News Translationcited by 119
  11. 2019Robust Neural Machine Translation with Doubly Adversarial Inputscited by 105
  12. 2019Discourse-Aware Neural Extractive Text Summarizationcited by 104
20 more
  1. 2019Defensive Quantization: When Efficiency Meets Robustnesscited by 95
  2. 2018On Adversarial Examples for Character-Level Neural Machine Translationcited by 85
  3. 2020Metamorphic Testing: A New Approach for Generating Next Test Casescited by 71
  4. 2018Did the Model Understand the Question?cited by 60
  5. 2018Adversarial Sample Detection for Deep Neural Network through Model Mutation Testingcited by 48
  6. 2019Automatic Testing and Improvement of Machine Translationcited by 35
  7. 2020Incomplete Utterance Rewriting as Semantic Segmentationcited by 33
  8. 2019Structure-Invariant Testing for Machine Translationcited by 27
  9. 2021Bridging Pre-trained Models and Downstream Tasks for Source Code Understandingcited by 27
  10. 2022Compressing Pre-trained Models of Code into 3 MBcited by 21
  11. 2020Testing Machine Translation via Referential Transparencycited by 19
  12. 2019Transforming Complex Sentences into a Semantic Hierarchycited by 15
  13. 2019Benchmarking Adversarial Robustnesscited by 15
  14. 2022AEON: A Method for Automatic Evaluation of NLP Test Casescited by 15
  15. 2020A Survey on Text Simplificationcited by 13
  16. 2022Automated Testing of Image Captioning Systemscited by 12
  17. 2019Explicit Sentence Compression for Neural Machine Translationcited by 11
  18. 2020SemMT: A Semantic-based Testing Approach for Machine Translation Systemscited by 5
  19. 2018Testing Untestable Neural Machine Translation: An Industrial Casecited by 4
  20. 2019DeepSearch: A Simple and Effective Blackbox Attack for Deep Neural Networkscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2.

2 papers.