Beyond Correlation: Interpretable Evaluation of Machine Translation Metrics
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine Translation (MT) evaluation metrics assess translation quality automatically. Recently, researchers have employed MT metrics for various new use cases, such as data filtering and translation re-ranking. However, most MT metrics return assessments as scalar scores that are difficult to interpret, posing a challenge to making informed design choices. Moreover, MT metrics' capabilities have historically been evaluated using correlation with human judgment, which, despite its efficacy, falls short of providing intuitive insights into metric performance, especially in terms of new metric use cases. To address these issues, we introduce an interpretable evaluation framework for MT metrics. Within this framework, we evaluate metrics in two scenarios that serve as proxies for the data filtering and translation re-ranking use cases. Furthermore, by measuring the performance of MT metrics using Precision, Recall, and F-score, we offer clearer insights into their capabilities than correlation with human judgments. Finally, we raise concerns regarding the reliability of manually curated data following the Direct Assessments+Scalar Quality Metrics (DA+SQM) guidelines, reporting a notably low agreement with Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) annotations.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 39 of its 73 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2024.
Builds on
39 of 73 references.
References · 39
- 2019Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scalecited by 3,907
- 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,898
- 2020mT5: A massively multilingual pre-trained text-to-text transformercited by 1,813
- 2019Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AIcited by 1,543
- 2022No Language Left Behind: Scaling Human-Centered Machine Translationcited by 1,290
- 2021DeBERTaV3: Improving DeBERTa using ELECTRA-Style Pre-Training with Gradient-Disentangled Embedding Sharingcited by 1,219
- 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,196
- 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,024
- 2018Subword Regularization: Improving Neural Network Translation Models with Multiple Subword Candidatescited by 632
- 2021The FLORES-101 Evaluation Benchmark for Low-Resource and Multilingual Machine Translationcited by 556
- 2023Reinforced Self-Training (ReST) for Language Modelingcited by 486
- 2024Contrastive Preference Optimization: Pushing the Boundaries of LLM Performance in Machine Translationcited by 390
27 more
- 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 333
- 2023xCOMET: Transparent Machine Translation Evaluation through Fine-grained Error Detectioncited by 260
- 2020InfoXLM: An Information-Theoretic Framework for Cross-Lingual Language Model Pre-Trainingcited by 237
- 2022CometKiwi: IST-Unbabel 2022 Submission for the Quality Estimation Shared Taskcited by 205
- 2024Tower: An Open Multilingual Large Language Model for Translation-Related Taskscited by 205
- 2020Tangled up in BLEU: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation Metricscited by 155
- 2023GEMBA-MQM: Detecting Translation Quality Error Spans with GPT-4cited by 143
- 2020Is MAP Decoding All You Need? The Inadequacy of the Mode in Neural Machine Translationcited by 137
- 2021High Quality Rather than High Model Probability: Minimum Bayes Risk Decoding with Neural Metricscited by 104
- 2020Rethinking embedding coupling in pre-trained language modelscited by 103
- 2021Learning Compact Metrics for MTcited by 93
- 2023Scaling up COMETKIWI: Unbabel-IST 2023 Submission for the Quality Estimation Shared Taskcited by 88
- 2021Larger-Scale Transformers for Multilingual Masked Language Modelingcited by 86
- 2023Ties Matter: Meta-Evaluating Modern Metrics with Pairwise Accuracy and Tie Calibrationcited by 71
- 2021Sampling-Based Approximations to Minimum Bayes Risk Decoding for Neural Machine Translationcited by 63
- 2024Error Span Annotation: A Balanced Approach for Human Evaluation of Machine Translationcited by 62
- 2020MLQE-PE: A Multilingual Quality Estimation and Post-Editing Datasetcited by 47
- 2022DEMETR: Diagnosing Evaluation Metrics for Translationcited by 36
- 2023MBR and QE Finetuning: Training-time Distillation of the Best and Most Expensive Decoding Methodscited by 33
- 2024Improving Machine Translation with Human Feedback: An Exploration of Quality Estimation as a Reward Modelcited by 33
- 2022IndicMT Eval: A Dataset to Meta-Evaluate Machine Translation metrics for Indian Languagescited by 27
- 2021Translation Error Detection as Rationale Extractioncited by 22
- 2024Guardians of the Machine Translation Meta-Evaluation: Sentinel Metrics Fall In!cited by 21
- 2023There's no Data Like Better Data: Using QE Metrics for MT Data Filteringcited by 19
- 2023Aligning Neural Machine Translation Models: Human Feedback in Training and Inferencecited by 19
- 2024Can Automatic Metrics Assess High-Quality Translations?cited by 16
- 2023The Inside Story: Towards Better Understanding of Machine Translation Neural Evaluation Metricscited by 15
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 5.
10 papers.
- 2024Towards Cross-Cultural Machine Translation with Retrieval-Augmented Generation from Multilingual Knowledge Graphscited by 21
- 2025Has Machine Translation Evaluation Achieved Human Parity? The Human Reference and the Limits of Progresscited by 10
- 2024LLMs Lost in Translation: M-ALERT uncovers Cross-Linguistic Safety Inconsistenciescited by 6
- 2025MAATS: A Multi-Agent Automated Translation System Based on MQM Evaluationcited by 5
- 2025A Dual-Perspective NLG Meta-Evaluation Framework with Automatic Benchmark and Better Interpretabilitycited by 1
- 2026PEAR: Pairwise Evaluation for Automatic Relative Scoring in Machine Translationcited by 1
- 2026Which Metrics Save the Most Human Annotation? Prediction-Powered Evaluation and Meta-Evaluationcited by 1
- 2026Evaluating Explainable AI Attribution Methods in Neural Machine Translation via Attention-Guided Knowledge Distillationcited by 0
- 2026Span-Level Machine Translation Meta-Evaluationcited by 0
- 2026BaatCheet: A Multilingual Corpus for Dialogue Translation in Indian Languagescited by 0
- 2026BaatCheet: A Multilingual Corpus for Dialogue Translation in Indian Languages27 Sep 2026
- 2026Which Metrics Save the Most Human Annotation? Prediction-Powered Evaluation and Meta-Evaluation27 Aug 2026
- 2026Span-Level Machine Translation Meta-Evaluation20 Mar 2026
- 2026Evaluating Explainable AI Attribution Methods in Neural Machine Translation via Attention-Guided Knowledge Distillation11 Mar 2026
- 2026PEAR: Pairwise Evaluation for Automatic Relative Scoring in Machine Translation25 Jan 2026
- 2025Has Machine Translation Evaluation Achieved Human Parity? The Human Reference and the Limits of Progress24 Jun 2025
- 2025MAATS: A Multi-Agent Automated Translation System Based on MQM Evaluation20 May 2025
- 2025A Dual-Perspective NLG Meta-Evaluation Framework with Automatic Benchmark and Better Interpretability17 Feb 2025
- 2024LLMs Lost in Translation: M-ALERT uncovers Cross-Linguistic Safety Inconsistencies19 Dec 2024
- 2024Towards Cross-Cultural Machine Translation with Retrieval-Augmented Generation from Multilingual Knowledge Graphs17 Oct 2024