mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Towards Automatic Evaluation for Image Transcreation

arXiv 2412.13717 ↗First posted 18 Dec 2024cs.CL cs.CVcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Beyond conventional paradigms of translating speech and text, recently, there has been interest in automated transcreation of images to facilitate localization of visual content across different cultures. Attempts to define this as a formal Machine Learning (ML) problem have been impeded by the lack of automatic evaluation mechanisms, with previous work relying solely on human evaluation. In this paper, we seek to close this gap by proposing a suite of automatic evaluation metrics inspired by machine translation (MT) metrics, categorized into: a) Object-based, b) Embedding-based, and c) VLM-based. Drawing on theories from translation studies and real-world transcreation practices, we identify three critical dimensions of image transcreation: cultural relevance, semantic equivalence and visual similarity, and design our metrics to evaluate systems along these axes. Our results show that proprietary VLMs best identify cultural relevance and semantic equivalence, while vision-encoder representations are adept at measuring visual similarity. Meta-evaluation across 7 countries shows our metrics agree strongly with human ratings, with average segment-level correlations ranging from 0.55-0.87. Finally, through a discussion of the merits and demerits of each metric, we offer a robust framework for automated image transcreation evaluation, grounded in both theoretical foundations and practical application. Our code can be found here: https://github.com/simran-khanuja/automatic-eval-img-transcreation.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Dec 2024.

Builds on

12 of 36 references.

References · 12

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
  2. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
  3. 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,224
  4. 2023Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-Trainingcited by 3,109
  5. 2023G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignmentcited by 2,276
  6. 2019LVIS: A Dataset for Large Vocabulary Instance Segmentationcited by 1,217
  7. 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,033
  8. 2021BARTScore: Evaluating Generated Text as Text Generationcited by 722
  9. 2023GEMBA-MQM: Detecting Translation Quality Error Spans with GPT-4cited by 146
  10. 2024Preliminary WMT24 Ranking of General MT Systems and LLMscited by 20
  11. 2024Findings of the IWSLT 2024 Evaluation Campaigncited by 19
  12. 2024Machine Translation Meta Evaluation through Translation Accuracy Challenge Setscited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 4.

7 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Rethinking Multilingual Vision-Language Translation: Dataset, Evaluation, and Adaptation
  2. 2026MMTIT-Bench: A Multilingual and Multi-Scenario Benchmark with Cognition-Perception-Reasoning Guided Text-Image Machine Translation
  3. 2026"Inctelegi Romanecste?'' A Recipe for Romanian Vision-Language Models
  4. 2025CaMMT: Benchmarking Culturally Aware Multimodal Machine Translation
  5. 2025Exposing Blindspots: Cultural Bias Evaluation in Generative Image Models
  6. 2025Multimodal Language Models as Text-to-Image Model Evaluators
  7. 2025A Multimodal Recaptioning Framework to Account for Perceptual Diversity Across Languages in Vision-Language Modeling
  8. 2024Quantifying the Gaps Between Translation and Native Perception in Training for Multimodal, Multilingual Retrieval