mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Mind Which Bird You Favour: Parameterizing Adequacy-Fluency Balance in Meta-Evaluation of Machine Translation

arXiv 2609.14795 ↗First posted 13 Sep 2026cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

There is a tradeoff in machine translation meta-evaluation between prioritizing alignment with adequacy versus fluency. The balance depends on the combination of translation systems in the meta-evaluation dataset. This system set is a small, filtered sample whose characteristics change heavily across years and language pairs; it does not represent the true system distribution. Consequently, the adequacy-fluency balance is often unrepresentative and subject to change. For sensitive domains, controlling this balance is critical. We expose this balance as a tunable choice. To achieve a target balance, we reweight existing systems while minimizing distortion from uniform weighting, ensuring the evaluated systems remain real and representative. We provide an exact optimization algorithm with theoretical guarantees and pruning mechanisms to compute these weights. To validate meta-evaluation internal consistency, we design a scorer-augmentation framework that establishes a known relative identity for the scorers. Results demonstrate that our reweighting method effectively controls the adequacy-fluency balance and preserves the internal consistency, outperforming prior approaches. Finally, we analyze the performance of popular scorers across a sweep of this parameter.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Sep 2026.

Builds on

13 of 42 references.

References · 13

  1. 2023Large Language Models Are State-of-the-Art Evaluators of Translation Qualitycited by 420
  2. 2021Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translationcited by 338
  3. 2023xCOMET: Transparent Machine Translation Evaluation through Fine-grained Error Detectioncited by 265
  4. 2021To Ship or Not to Ship: An Extensive Evaluation of Automatic Metrics for Machine Translationcited by 163
  5. 2020Tangled up in BLEU: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation Metricscited by 158
  6. 2024MetricX-24: The Google Submission to the WMT 2024 Metrics Shared Taskcited by 93
  7. 2023Ties Matter: Meta-Evaluating Modern Metrics with Pairwise Accuracy and Tie Calibrationcited by 74
  8. 2024Improving Statistical Significance in Human Evaluation of Automatic Metrics via Soft Pairwise Accuracycited by 25
  9. 2018Fluency Over Adequacy: A Pilot Study in Measuring User Trust in Imperfect MTcited by 21
  10. 2024Guardians of the Machine Translation Meta-Evaluation: Sentinel Metrics Fall In!cited by 21
  11. 2017General Heuristics for Nonconvex Quadratically Constrained Quadratic Programmingcited by 17
  12. 2025You Cannot Feed Two Birds with One Score: the Accuracy-Naturalness Tradeoff in Translationcited by 4
1 more
  1. 2025Feeding Two Birds or Favoring One? Adequacy-Fluency Tradeoffs in Evaluation and Meta-Evaluation of Machine Translationcited by 4

Built on by

Not cited yet.