mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Feeding Two Birds or Favoring One? Adequacy-Fluency Tradeoffs in Evaluation and Meta-Evaluation of Machine Translation

arXiv 2509.20287 ↗First posted 24 Sep 2025cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We investigate the tradeoff between adequacy and fluency in machine translation. We show the severity of this tradeoff at the evaluation level and analyze where popular metrics fall within it. Essentially, current metrics generally lean toward adequacy, meaning that their scores correlate more strongly with the adequacy of translations than with fluency. More importantly, we find that this tradeoff also persists at the meta-evaluation level, and that the standard WMT meta-evaluation favors adequacy-oriented metrics over fluency-oriented ones. We show that this bias is partially attributed to the composition of the systems included in the meta-evaluation datasets. To control this bias, we propose a method that synthesizes translation systems in meta-evaluation. Our findings highlight the importance of understanding this tradeoff in meta-evaluation and its impact on metric rankings.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Sep 2025.

Builds on

17 of 46 references.

References · 17

  1. 2020mT5: A massively multilingual pre-trained text-to-text transformercited by 1,818
  2. 2020COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluationcited by 1,033
  3. 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 338
  4. 2023xCOMET: Transparent Machine Translation Evaluation through Fine-grained Error Detectioncited by 265
  5. 2021To Ship or Not to Ship: An Extensive Evaluation of Automatic Metrics for Machine Translationcited by 163
  6. 2024MetricX-24: The Google Submission to the WMT 2024 Metrics Shared Taskcited by 93
  7. 2017RUBER: An Unsupervised Method for Automatic Evaluation of Open-Domain Dialog Systemscited by 88
  8. 2023Scaling up COMETKIWI: Unbabel-IST 2023 Submission for the Quality Estimation Shared Taskcited by 88
  9. 2019Beyond BLEU: Training Neural Machine Translation with Semantic Similaritycited by 84
  10. 2023Ties Matter: Meta-Evaluating Modern Metrics with Pairwise Accuracy and Tie Calibrationcited by 74
  11. 2024Improving Statistical Significance in Human Evaluation of Automatic Metrics via Soft Pairwise Accuracycited by 25
  12. 2018Fluency Over Adequacy: A Pilot Study in Measuring User Trust in Imperfect MTcited by 21
5 more
  1. 2024Guardians of the Machine Translation Meta-Evaluation: Sentinel Metrics Fall In!cited by 21
  2. 2024Machine Translation Meta Evaluation through Translation Accuracy Challenge Setscited by 18
  3. 2025Reference-free Evaluation Metrics for Text Generation: A Surveycited by 9
  4. 2021Assessing Reference-Free Peer Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 8
  5. 2025You Cannot Feed Two Birds with One Score: the Accuracy-Naturalness Tradeoff in Translationcited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.

4 papers.