mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Evaluating Structural Generalization in Neural Machine Translation

arXiv 2406.13363 ↗First posted 19 Jun 2024cs.CLcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Compositional generalization refers to the ability to generalize to novel combinations of previously observed words and syntactic structures. Since it is regarded as a desired property of neural models, recent work has assessed compositional generalization in machine translation as well as semantic parsing. However, previous evaluations with machine translation have focused mostly on lexical generalization (i.e., generalization to unseen combinations of known words). Thus, it remains unclear to what extent models can translate sentences that require structural generalization (i.e., generalization to different sorts of syntactic structures). To address this question, we construct SGET, a machine translation dataset covering various types of compositional generalization with control of words and sentence structures. We evaluate neural machine translation models on SGET and show that they struggle more in structural generalization than in lexical generalization. We also find different performance trends in semantic parsing and machine translation, which indicates the importance of evaluations across various tasks.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Jun 2024.

Builds on

22 of 34 references.

References · 22

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  4. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,898
  5. 2018A Call for Clarity in Reporting BLEU Scorescited by 1,790
  6. 2019Measuring Compositional Generalization: A Comprehensive Method on Realistic Datacited by 280
  7. 2020COGS: A Compositional Generalization Challenge Based on Semantic Interpretationcited by 260
  8. 2017OpenNMT: Open-source Toolkit for Neural Machine Translationcited by 251
  9. 2020Compositional Generalization and Natural Language Variation: Can a Semantic Parsing Approach Handle Both?cited by 147
  10. 2021The Devil is in the Detail: Simple Tricks Improve Systematic Generalization of Transformerscited by 117
  11. 2021The paradox of the compositionality of natural language: a neural machine translation case studycited by 58
  12. 2023How Do In-Context Examples Affect Compositional Generalization?cited by 51
10 more
  1. 2021On Compositional Generalization of Neural Machine Translationcited by 34
  2. 2022Uncontrolled Lexical Exposure Leads to Overestimation of Compositional Generalization in Pretrained Modelscited by 26
  3. 2022Structural generalization is hard for sequence-to-sequence modelscited by 24
  4. 2023ReCOGS: How Incidental Details of a Logical Form Overshadow an Evaluation of Semantic Interpretationcited by 24
  5. 2023SLOG: A Structural Generalization Benchmark for Semantic Parsingcited by 22
  6. 2019On Compositionality in Neural Machine Translationcited by 14
  7. 2023On Evaluating Multilingual Compositional Generalization with Translated Datasetscited by 6
  8. 2022Real-World Compositional Generalization with Disentangled Sequence-to-Sequence Learningcited by 3
  9. 2020Revisit Systematic Generalization via Meaningful Learningcited by 1
  10. 2023On Using Distribution-Based Compositionality Assessment to Evaluate Compositional Generalisation in Machine Translationcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

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

2 papers.