Evaluating the IWSLT2023 Speech Translation Tasks: Human Annotations, Automatic Metrics, and Segmentation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Human evaluation is a critical component in machine translation system development and has received much attention in text translation research. However, little prior work exists on the topic of human evaluation for speech translation, which adds additional challenges such as noisy data and segmentation mismatches. We take first steps to fill this gap by conducting a comprehensive human evaluation of the results of several shared tasks from the last International Workshop on Spoken Language Translation (IWSLT 2023). We propose an effective evaluation strategy based on automatic resegmentation and direct assessment with segment context. Our analysis revealed that: 1) the proposed evaluation strategy is robust and scores well-correlated with other types of human judgements; 2) automatic metrics are usually, but not always, well-correlated with direct assessment scores; and 3) COMET as a slightly stronger automatic metric than chrF, despite the segmentation noise introduced by the resegmentation step systems. We release the collected human-annotated data in order to encourage further investigation.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Jun 2024.
Builds on
7 of 26 references.
References · 7
- 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,033
- 2020Tangled up in BLEU: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation Metricscited by 158
- 2021Cascade versus Direct Speech Translation: Do the Differences Still Make a Difference?cited by 54
- 2020Breeding Gender-aware Direct Speech Translation Systemscited by 16
- 2022Don't Discard Fixed-Window Audio Segmentation in Speech-to-Text Translationcited by 8
- 2022Continuous Rating as Reliable Human Evaluation of Simultaneous Speech Translationcited by 6
- 2021On User Interfaces for Large-Scale Document-Level Human Evaluation of Machine Translation Outputscited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 3.
5 papers.
- 2024Pitfalls and Outlooks in Using COMETcited by 10
- 2024SpeechQE: Estimating the Quality of Direct Speech Translationcited by 10
- 2025Extending Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation to Book-Length Documentscited by 6
- 2025Better Late Than Never: Meta-Evaluation of Latency Metrics for Simultaneous Speech-to-Text Translationcited by 4
- 2025How to Evaluate Speech Translation with Source-Aware Neural MT Metricscited by 3
- 2025How to Evaluate Speech Translation with Source-Aware Neural MT Metrics5 Nov 2025
- 2025Better Late Than Never: Meta-Evaluation of Latency Metrics for Simultaneous Speech-to-Text Translation22 Sep 2025
- 2025Extending Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation to Book-Length Documents21 Sep 2025
- 2024SpeechQE: Estimating the Quality of Direct Speech Translation28 Oct 2024
- 2024Pitfalls and Outlooks in Using COMET27 Aug 2024