The state-of-the-art language model-based automatic metrics, e.g. BARTScore, benefiting from large-scale contextualized pre-training, have been successfully used in a wide range of natural language generation (NLG) tasks, including machine translation, text summarization, and data-to-text. Recent studies show that considering both major errors (e.g. mistranslated tokens) and minor errors (e.g. imperfections in fluency) can produce high-quality human judgments. This inspires us to approach the final goal of the evaluation metrics (human-like evaluations) by automatic error analysis. To this end, we augment BARTScore by incorporating the human-like error analysis strategies, namely BARTScore++, where the final score consists of both the evaluations of major errors and minor errors. Experimental results show that BARTScore++ can consistently improve the performance of vanilla BARTScore and outperform existing top-scoring metrics in 20 out of 25 test settings. We hope our technique can also be extended to other pre-trained model-based metrics. We will release our code and scripts to facilitate the community.

State-of-the-art machine translation evaluation metrics are based on black-box language models. Hence, recent works consider their explainability with the goals of better understandability for humans and better metric analysis, including failure cases. In contrast, we explicitly leverage explanations to boost the metrics' performance. In particular, we perceive explanations as word-level scores, which we convert, via power means, into sentence-level scores. We combine this sentence-level score with the original metric to obtain a better metric. Our extensive evaluation and analysis across 5 datasets, 5 metrics and 4 explainability techniques shows that some configurations reliably improve the original metrics' correlation with human judgment. On two held datasets for testing, we obtain improvements in 15/18 resp. 4/4 cases. The gains in Pearson correlation are up to 0.032 resp. 0.055. We make our code available.

While the problem of hallucinations in neural machine translation has long been recognized, so far the progress on its alleviation is very little. Indeed, recently it turned out that without artificially encouraging models to hallucinate, previously existing methods fall short and even the standard sequence log-probability is more informative. It means that characteristics internal to the model can give much more information than we expect, and before using external models and measures, we first need to ask: how far can we go if we use nothing but the translation model itself ? We propose to use a method that evaluates the percentage of the source contribution to a generated translation. Intuitively, hallucinations are translations "detached" from the source, hence they can be identified by low source contribution. This method improves detection accuracy for the most severe hallucinations by a factor of 2 and is able to alleviate hallucinations at test time on par with the previous best approach that relies on external models. Next, if we move away from internal model characteristics and allow external tools, we show that using sentence similarity from cross-lingual embeddings further improves these results.

Machine Translation Quality Estimation (QE) is the task of evaluating translation output in the absence of human-written references. Due to the scarcity of human-labeled QE data, previous works attempted to utilize the abundant unlabeled parallel corpora to produce additional training data with pseudo labels. In this paper, we demonstrate a significant gap between parallel data and real QE data: for QE data, it is strictly guaranteed that the source side is original texts and the target side is translated (namely translationese). However, for parallel data, it is indiscriminate and the translationese may occur on either source or target side. We compare the impact of parallel data with different translation directions in QE data augmentation, and find that using the source-original part of parallel corpus consistently outperforms its target-original counterpart. Moreover, since the WMT corpus lacks direction information for each parallel sentence, we train a classifier to distinguish source- and target-original bitext, and carry out an analysis of their difference in both style and domain. Together, these findings suggest using source-original parallel data for QE data augmentation, which brings a relative improvement of up to 4.0% and 6.4% compared to undifferentiated data on sentence- and word-level QE tasks respectively.

While prior work has established that the use of parallel data is conducive for cross-lingual learning, it is unclear if the improvements come from the data itself, or if it is the modeling of parallel interactions that matters. Exploring this, we examine the usage of unsupervised machine translation to generate synthetic parallel data, and compare it to supervised machine translation and gold parallel data. We find that even model generated parallel data can be useful for downstream tasks, in both a general setting (continued pretraining) as well as the task-specific setting (translate-train), although our best results are still obtained using real parallel data. Our findings suggest that existing multilingual models do not exploit the full potential of monolingual data, and prompt the community to reconsider the traditional categorization of cross-lingual learning approaches.

kNN-MT presents a new paradigm for domain adaptation by building an external datastore, which usually saves all target language token occurrences in the parallel corpus. As a result, the constructed datastore is usually large and possibly redundant. In this paper, we investigate the interpretability issue of this approach: what knowledge does the NMT model need? We propose the notion of local correctness (LAC) as a new angle, which describes the potential translation correctness for a single entry and for a given neighborhood. Empirical study shows that our investigation successfully finds the conditions where the NMT model could easily fail and need related knowledge. Experiments on six diverse target domains and two language-pairs show that pruning according to local correctness brings a light and more explainable memory for kNN-MT domain adaptation.

In this paper, we propose a novel architecture, the Enhanced Interactive Transformer (EIT), to address the issue of head degradation in self-attention mechanisms. Our approach replaces the traditional multi-head self-attention mechanism with the Enhanced Multi-Head Attention (EMHA) mechanism, which relaxes the one-to-one mapping constraint among queries and keys, allowing each query to attend to multiple keys. Furthermore, we introduce two interaction models, Inner-Subspace Interaction and Cross-Subspace Interaction, to fully utilize the many-to-many mapping capabilities of EMHA. Extensive experiments on a wide range of tasks (e.g. machine translation, abstractive summarization, grammar correction, language modelling and brain disease automatic diagnosis) show its superiority with a very modest increase in model size.

Despite all this promise, adoption of AI is not where many expected (or hoped) that it might be. Research continues to improve the underlying AI technology--the recent of development of both Midjourney and Stable Diffusion4 is a case in point--and firms continue to invest in AI.5 We even saw a bump in investment during the first couple of years of the pandemic.6 However, a majority of AI projects fail.7 Compelling demonstrations are not transitioning into value creating solutions. Autonomous cars are a prime example, where commercial, mass market, versions constantly seem to be a decade away, despite early success and significant investment. We hear a similar story from AI practitioners working in firms attempting to leverage AI, with carefully developed models and solutions left on the bench as they are either not compelling enough or too fragile to replace existing solutions. There are notable successes, such as machine language translation, however there appears to have been more misses.

Recently i discovered a feature in chatGPT which is the ability to translate languages i did a research comparing the two software's chatGPT and google translate In recent years, natural language processing (NLP) technology has made significant advances, allowing for the development of software that can understand and generate human language with increasing accuracy. One example of this is the chatGPT (chat Generative Pre-training Transformer) language model, developed by OpenAI. Another example is Google Translate, a popular translation service offered by Google. Both chatGPT and Google Translate use advanced NLP techniques to process and generate human language, but they differ in their intended use and capabilities. In this article, we will explore the similarities and differences between chatGPT and Google Translate, and examine whether chatGPT has the potential to replace Google Translate in the future.

A challenge in spoken language translation is that plenty of spoken content is long-form, but short units are necessary for obtaining high-quality translations. To address this mismatch, we fine-tune a general-purpose, large language model to split long ASR transcripts into segments that can be independently translated so as to maximize the overall translation quality. We compare to several segmentation strategies and find that our approach improves BLEU score on three languages by an average of 2.7 BLEU overall compared to an automatic punctuation baseline. Further, we demonstrate the effectiveness of two constrained decoding strategies to improve well-formedness of the model output from above 99% to 100%.