Reference bias in monolingual machine translation evaluation

In the translation industry, human translations are assessed by comparison with the source texts. In the Machine Translation (MT) research community, however, it is a common practice to perform quality assessment using a reference translation instead of the source text. In this paper we show that this practice has a serious issue - annotators are strongly biased by the reference translation provided, and this can have a negative impact on the assessment of MT quality

What Level of Quality can Neural Machine Translation Attain on Literary Text?

Given the rise of a new approach to MT, Neural MT (NMT), and its promising performance on different text types, we assess the translation quality it can attain on what is perceived to be the greatest challenge for MT: literary text. Specifically, we target novels, arguably the most popular type of literary text. We build a literary-adapted NMT system for the English-to-Catalan translation direction and evaluate it against a system pertaining to the previous dominant paradigm in MT: statistical phrase-based MT (PBSMT). To this end, for the first time we train MT systems, both NMT and PBSMT, on large amounts of literary text (over 100 million words) and evaluate them on a set of twelve widely known novels spanning from the the 1920s to the present day. According to the BLEU automatic evaluation metric, NMT is significantly better than PBSMT (p < 0.01) on all the novels considered. Overall, NMT results in a 11% relative improvement (3 points absolute) over PBSMT. A complementary human evaluation on three of the books shows that between 17% and 34% of the translations, depending on the book, produced by NMT (versus 8% and 20% with PBSMT) are perceived by native speakers of the target language to be of equivalent quality to translations produced by a professional human translator.Comment: Chapter for the forthcoming book "Translation Quality Assessment: From Principles to Practice" (Springer

Dublin City University at CLEF 2004: experiments with the ImageCLEF St Andrew's collection

For the CLEF 2004 ImageCLEF St Andrew's Collection task the Dublin City University group carried out three sets of experiments: standard cross-language information retrieval (CLIR) runs using topic translation via machine translation (MT), combination of this run with image matching results from the VIPER system, and a novel document rescoring approach based on automatic MT evaluation metrics. Our standard MT-based CLIR works well on this task. Encouragingly combination with image matching lists is also observed to produce small positive changes in the retrieval output. However, rescoring using the MT evaluation metrics in their current form significantly reduced retrieval effectiveness