mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Finding Replicable Human Evaluations via Stable Ranking Probability

arXiv 2404.01474 ↗First posted 1 Apr 2024cs.CLcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Reliable human evaluation is critical to the development of successful natural language generation models, but achieving it is notoriously difficult. Stability is a crucial requirement when ranking systems by quality: consistent ranking of systems across repeated evaluations is not just desirable, but essential. Without it, there is no reliable foundation for hill-climbing or product launch decisions. In this paper, we use machine translation and its state-of-the-art human evaluation framework, MQM, as a case study to understand how to set up reliable human evaluations that yield stable conclusions. We investigate the optimal configurations for item allocation to raters, number of ratings per item, and score normalization. Our study on two language pairs provides concrete recommendations for designing replicable human evaluation studies. We also collect and release the largest publicly available dataset of multi-segment translations rated by multiple professional translators, consisting of nearly 140,000 segment annotations across two language pairs.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 6 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Apr 2024.

Builds on

6 of 26 references.

References · 6

  1. 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 333
  2. 2022Repairing the Cracked Foundation: A Survey of Obstacles in Evaluation Practices for Generated Textcited by 154
  3. 2021Measuring Uncertainty in Translation Quality Evaluation (TQE)cited by 16
  4. 2022Consistent Human Evaluation of Machine Translation across Language Pairscited by 13
  5. 2022Toward More Effective Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 10
  6. 2022Searching for a higher power in the human evaluation of MTcited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

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

13 papers.

Sort:

By area: