Assessing Reference-Free Peer Evaluation for Machine Translation (2021.naacl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods to evaluate machine translation output are based on comparing MT output to one or more reference translations. |
| Approach: | They propose to use probabilities given by a large, multilingual model as a reference-free metric. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model is robust and likely to offer reasonable performance across a broad spectrum of domains and different system qualities. |
Similar Papers
A Holistic Approach to Reference-Free Evaluation of Machine Translation (2023.acl-short)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Traditional machine translation evaluation relies on reference written by humans . reference-free evaluation gets rid of labor-intensive annotations, which can pivot easily to new domains . |
| Approach: | They propose a reference-free evaluation approach that characterizes evaluation as two aspects: fluency and faithfulness. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach outperforms SOTA reference-fee metrics on machine translation datasets. |
On the Limitations of Reference-Free Evaluations of Generated Text (2022.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a recent study has shown that evaluation metrics which accurately estimate the quality of generated text are limited in their ability to evaluate generated text. |
| Approach: | They argue that reference-free metrics are limited in their ability to evaluate generated text . they recommend that they be used as diagnostic tools for analyzing and understanding model behavior . |
| Outcome: | The proposed evaluation metrics are limited in their ability to evaluate generated text . they can be optimized at test time, can be biased against models with similar outputs . |
On the Limitations of Cross-lingual Encoders as Exposed by Reference-Free Machine Translation Evaluation (2020.acl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a standard evaluation setup for supervised machine learning tasks does not hold for natural language generation tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose to use reference-free machine translation evaluation to compare source texts to system translations to find key limitations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed metrics perform poorly as semantic encoders for reference-free machine translation evaluation. |
Tangled up in BLEU: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Automatic Machine Translation Evaluation Metrics (2020.acl-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for judging metrics are sensitive to the translations used for evaluation, leading to falsely confident conclusions about a metric’s efficacy. |
| Approach: | They propose a method for thresholding performance improvement under an automatic metric against human judgements by using a pairwise system ranking method. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method allows quantification of type I versus type II errors incurred, i.e., insignificant human differences in system quality that are accepted, and significant human differences that are rejected. |
Scientific Credibility of Machine Translation Research: A Meta-Evaluation of 769 Papers (2021.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a meta-evaluation of machine translation (MT) has been conducted in 769 research papers . a recent study shows that evaluation practices have changed over the past decade . |
| Approach: | They propose a meta-evaluation method for machine translation that uses BLEU scores to evaluate MT performance. |
| Outcome: | The proposed meta-evaluation of machine translation shows that evaluation practices have changed over the past decade . the authors suggest that the evaluation process should be streamlined and standardized to ensure the validity of the evaluation method . |
Online Learning Meets Machine Translation Evaluation: Finding the Best Systems with the Least Human Effort (2021.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods to evaluate multiple systems are expensive and require human evaluators. |
| Approach: | They propose a novel online learning approach that dynamically converges to the top-3 ranked systems for the language pairs considered by taking advantage of human feedback. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach converges to the top-3 ranked systems for the language pairs considered despite the lack of human feedback for many translations. |
KoBE: Knowledge-Based Machine Translation Evaluation (2020.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for machine translation evaluation do not require reference translations. |
| Approach: | They propose a method for machine translation evaluation which does not require reference translations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method achieves highest correlation with human judgements on 9 out of 18 language pairs from the WMT19 benchmark for evaluation without references. |
Spurious Correlations in Reference-Free Evaluation of Text Generation (2022.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent work suggests that reference-free evaluation metrics may rely on spurious correlations with human judgments. |
| Approach: | They propose to use model-based, reference-free evaluation metrics to evaluate natural language generation systems. |
| Outcome: | The proposed metrics achieve high correlations with human judgments, but they may not be robust enough to evaluate their efficacy and robustness. |
BLEU might be Guilty but References are not Innocent (2020.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Using a method to collect references and compare their value with human evaluations, we show that multi-reference BLEU does not improve the correlation for high quality output. |
| Approach: | They propose a method to compare the quality of automated metrics by analyzing references and comparing them with human evaluations. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method improves correlation with all modern evaluation metrics including embedding-based methods. |
Is Reference Necessary in the Evaluation of NLG Systems? When and Where? (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Despite recent advances in reference-free metrics, it has not been well understood when and where they can be used as an alternative to reference-based metrics. |
| Approach: | They propose to use reference-free metrics to evaluate NLG systems . they find they have a higher correlation with human judgment and greater sensitivity to deficiencies in language quality . |
| Outcome: | The proposed metrics exhibit higher correlation with human judgment and greater sensitivity to deficiencies in language quality. |