LiTransProQA: an LLM-based Literary Translation evaluation metric with Professional Question Answering
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The impact of Large Language Models (LLMs) has extended into literary domains. However, existing evaluation metrics for literature prioritize mechanical accuracy over artistic expression and tend to overrate machine translation as being superior to human translation from experienced professionals. In the long run, this bias could result in an irreversible decline in translation quality and cultural authenticity. In response to the urgent need for a specialized literary evaluation metric, we introduce LITRANSPROQA, a novel, reference-free, LLM-based question-answering framework designed for literary translation evaluation. LITRANSPROQA integrates humans in the loop to incorporate insights from professional literary translators and researchers, focusing on critical elements in literary quality assessment such as literary devices, cultural understanding, and authorial voice. Our extensive evaluation shows that while literary-finetuned XCOMET-XL yields marginal gains, LITRANSPROQA substantially outperforms current metrics, achieving up to 0.07 gain in correlation and surpassing the best state-of-the-art metrics by over 15 points in adequacy assessments. Incorporating professional translator insights as weights further improves performance, highlighting the value of translator inputs. Notably, LITRANSPROQA reaches an adequacy performance comparable to trained linguistic student evaluators, though it still falls behind experienced professional translators. LITRANSPROQA shows broad applicability to open-source models like LLaMA3.3-70b and Qwen2.5-32b, indicating its potential as an accessible and training-free tool for evaluating literary translations that require local processing due to copyright or ethical considerations.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 79 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 May 2025.
Builds on
31 of 79 references.
References · 31
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
- 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,512
- 2020BLEURT: Learning Robust Metrics for Text Generationcited by 1,203
- 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 742
- 2024Prometheus 2: An Open Source Language Model Specialized in Evaluating Other Language Modelscited by 446
- 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 338
- 2023xCOMET: Transparent Machine Translation Evaluation through Fine-grained Error Detectioncited by 265
- 2021QAFactEval: Improved QA-Based Factual Consistency Evaluation for Summarizationcited by 236
- 2023Art or Artifice? Large Language Models and the False Promise of Creativitycited by 172
- 2023GEMBA-MQM: Detecting Translation Quality Error Spans with GPT-4cited by 146
19 more
- 2023Large language models effectively leverage document-level context for literary translation, but critical errors persistcited by 80
- 2023Ties Matter: Meta-Evaluating Modern Metrics with Pairwise Accuracy and Tie Calibrationcited by 74
- 2024FABLES: Evaluating faithfulness and content selection in book-length summarizationcited by 65
- 2024Error Span Annotation: A Balanced Approach for Human Evaluation of Machine Translationcited by 62
- 2021BlonDe: An Automatic Evaluation Metric for Document-level Machine Translationcited by 58
- 2023Long-Tail Learning with Foundation Model: Heavy Fine-Tuning Hurtscited by 58
- 2022Exploring Document-Level Literary Machine Translation with Parallel Paragraphs from World Literaturecited by 45
- 2025Transforming Science with Large Language Models: A Survey on AI-assisted Scientific Discovery, Experimentation, Content Generation, and Evaluationcited by 42
- 2025M-Prometheus: A Suite of Open Multilingual LLM Judgescited by 38
- 2022DiscoScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT and Discourse Coherencecited by 36
- 2022ByGPT5: End-to-End Style-conditioned Poetry Generation with Token-free Language Modelscited by 25
- 2023Findings of the WMT 2023 Shared Task on Discourse-Level Literary Translation: A Fresh Orb in the Cosmos of LLMscited by 25
- 2024How Good Are LLMs for Literary Translation, Really? Literary Translation Evaluation with Humans and LLMscited by 23
- 2024GPT-4 vs. Human Translators: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Translation Quality Across Languages, Domains, and Expertise Levelscited by 21
- 2024Evaluating Diversity in Automatic Poetry Generationcited by 17
- 2022Shortcomings of Question Answering Based Factuality Frameworks for Error Localizationcited by 15
- 2024LLM-based multi-agent poetry generation in non-cooperative environmentscited by 15
- 2025Do LLMs Understand Your Translations? Evaluating Paragraph-level MT with Question Answeringcited by 10
- 2025AskQE: Question Answering as Automatic Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 6.
10 papers.
- 2025Emotionally Charged, Logically Blurred: AI-driven Emotional Framing Impairs Human Fallacy Detectioncited by 3
- 2025Building Large-Scale English-Romanian Literary Translation Resources with Open Modelscited by 2
- 2026Creativity Bias: How Machine Evaluation Struggles with Creativity in Literary Translationscited by 2
- 2026Beyond Reproduction: A Paired-Task Framework for Assessing LLM Comprehension and Creativity in Literary Translationcited by 1
- 2026Beyond Accuracy: Community Perspectives on Machine Translationcited by 1
- 2025Conveying Imagistic Thinking in Traditional Chinese Medicine Translation: A Prompt Engineering and LLM-Based Evaluation Frameworkcited by 0
- 2025Conveying Imagistic Thinking in Traditional Chinese Medicine Translation: A Prompt Engineering and LLM-Based Evaluation Frameworkcited by 0
- 2026LLMs Should Incorporate Explicit Mechanisms for Human Empathycited by 0
- 2026Beyond BLEU: A Case for Redefining Sign Language Translation Benchmarkscited by 0
- 2026CultureMINE: Datasets and Methods for Improving the Cultural Capabilities of NLP Systemscited by 0
- 2026CultureMINE: Datasets and Methods for Improving the Cultural Capabilities of NLP Systems18 Sep 2026
- 2026Beyond BLEU: A Case for Redefining Sign Language Translation Benchmarks3 Sep 2026
- 2026Beyond Accuracy: Community Perspectives on Machine Translation8 Jun 2026
- 2026Creativity Bias: How Machine Evaluation Struggles with Creativity in Literary Translations13 May 2026
- 2026Beyond Reproduction: A Paired-Task Framework for Assessing LLM Comprehension and Creativity in Literary Translation20 Apr 2026
- 2026LLMs Should Incorporate Explicit Mechanisms for Human Empathy12 Apr 2026
- 2025Conveying Imagistic Thinking in Traditional Chinese Medicine Translation: A Prompt Engineering and LLM-Based Evaluation Framework1 Dec 2025
- 2025Conveying Imagistic Thinking in Traditional Chinese Medicine Translation: A Prompt Engineering and LLM-Based Evaluation Framework28 Nov 2025
- 2025Emotionally Charged, Logically Blurred: AI-driven Emotional Framing Impairs Human Fallacy Detection9 Oct 2025
- 2025Building Large-Scale English-Romanian Literary Translation Resources with Open Models9 Sep 2025