# Evaluating Communicative Success in Machine-Translated Conversation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.19885 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.19885/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 40 of its 75 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 40)

- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09675/) (2019)
- [G-Eval: NLG Evaluation using GPT-4 with Better Human Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.16634/) (2023)
- [FActScore: Fine-grained Atomic Evaluation of Factual Precision in Long Form Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14251/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.19348/) (2026)
- [COMET: A Neural Framework for MT Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.09025/) (2020)
- [Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckList](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.04118/) (2020)
- [The State and Fate of Linguistic Diversity and Inclusion in the NLP World](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.09095/) (2020)
- [Language-agnostic BERT Sentence Embedding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.01852/) (2020)
- [The FLORES-101 Evaluation Benchmark for Low-Resource and Multilingual Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.03193/) (2021)
- [Google's Multilingual Neural Machine Translation System: Enabling Zero-Shot Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1611.04558/) (2016)
- [Large Language Models Are State-of-the-Art Evaluators of Translation Quality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.14520/) (2023)
- [Experts, Errors, and Context: A Large-Scale Study of Human Evaluation for Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.14478/) (2021)
- [Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.18796/) (2024)
- [MEGA: Multilingual Evaluation of Generative AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.12528/) (2023)
- [Challenges and Strategies in Cross-Cultural NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.10020/) (2022)
- [Dear Sir or Madam, May I introduce the GYAFC Dataset: Corpus, Benchmarks and Metrics for Formality Style Transfer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.06535/) (2018)
- [CometKiwi: IST-Unbabel 2022 Submission for the Quality Estimation Shared Task](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.06243/) (2022)
- [Participatory Research for Low-resourced Machine Translation: A Case Study in African Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.02353/) (2020)
- [Long-form factuality in large language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.18802/) (2024)
- [Having Beer after Prayer? Measuring Cultural Bias in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14456/) (2023)
- [GEMBA-MQM: Detecting Translation Quality Error Spans with GPT-4](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13988/) (2023)
- [Neural Machine Translation for Low-Resource Languages: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.15115/) (2021)
- [Politeness Transfer: A Tag and Generate Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.14257/) (2020)
- [Speech Translation and the End-to-End Promise: Taking Stock of Where We Are](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.06358/) (2020)
- [Style Over Substance: Evaluation Biases for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03025/) (2023)
- [EXAONE 3.5: Series of Large Language Models for Real-world Use Cases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.04862/) (2024)
- [GlotLID: Language Identification for Low-Resource Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.16248/) (2023)
- [Are Multilingual LLMs Culturally-Diverse Reasoners? An Investigation into Multicultural Proverbs and Sayings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.08591/) (2023)
- [Can Transformer be Too Compositional? Analysing Idiom Processing in Neural Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.15301/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Interpreter agents built on machine translation (MT) increasingly mediate live conversation between people who do not share a language, yet we still evaluate them with metrics built for isolated sentences, which measure fidelity rather than whether communication succeeds. We introduce a reusable three-layer checklist-and-judge framework that evaluates interpreter-mediated conversation across semantic, pragmatic, and cultural-social dimensions, covering the naturalness, intent, and social appropriateness that fidelity metrics leave unmeasured. It runs in both single-turn and interactive multi-turn settings, where simulated users reply to translated messages as the conversation unfolds and each turn is scored alongside the conversation as a whole. We extensively validate it through controlled perturbations, cross-judge comparisons, and human annotations. Our main single-turn benchmark evaluates 10 interpreter setups across Arabic, Bengali, Indonesian, and Korean from 5,624 OpenSubtitles-derived scenarios spanning 12 translation directions, and our multi-turn study covers all 6 language pairs in scripted and live modes. Results show a consistent decline from semantic to pragmatic and cultural-social success, while conventional MT metrics overlook failures among stronger interpreters, and prompt ablations show that scenario context, structured instructions, and cultural context improve communicative success, although gains vary across setups. Our work thus provides an evaluation framework and benchmark for interpreter agents in conversation, and highlights the importance of communicative success alongside existing translation metrics.