Paper detail

Rethink about the Word-level Quality Estimation for Machine Translation from Human Judgement

Word-level Quality Estimation (QE) of Machine Translation (MT) aims to find out potential translation errors in the translated sentence without reference. Typically, conventional works on word-level QE are designed to predict the translation quality in terms of the post-editing effort, where the word labels ("OK" and "BAD") are automatically generated by comparing words between MT sentences and the post-edited sentences through a Translation Error Rate (TER) toolkit. While the post-editing effort can be used to measure the translation quality to some extent, we find it usually conflicts with the human judgement on whether the word is well or poorly translated. To overcome the limitation, we first create a golden benchmark dataset, namely \emph{HJQE} (Human Judgement on Quality Estimation), where the expert translators directly annotate the poorly translated words on their judgements. Additionally, to further make use of the parallel corpus, we propose the self-supervised pre-training with two tag correcting strategies, namely tag refinement strategy and tree-based annotation strategy, to make the TER-based artificial QE corpus closer to \emph{HJQE}. We conduct substantial experiments based on the publicly available WMT En-De and En-Zh corpora. The results not only show our proposed dataset is more consistent with human judgment but also confirm the effectiveness of the proposed tag correcting strategies.\footnote{The data can be found at \url{https://github.com/ZhenYangIACAS/HJQE}.}

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.