The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has led to remarkable progress on a wide range of natural language processing tasks. Despite the advances, these large-sized models still suffer from hallucinating information in their output, which poses a major issue in automatic text summarization, as we must guarantee that the generated summary is consistent with the content of the source document. Previous research addresses the challenging task of detecting hallucinations in the output (i.e. inconsistency detection) in order to evaluate the faithfulness of the generated summaries. However, these works primarily focus on English and recent multilingual approaches lack German data. This work presents absinth, a manually annotated dataset for hallucination detection in German news summarization and explores the capabilities of novel open-source LLMs on this task in both fine-tuning and in-context learning settings. We open-source and release the absinth dataset to foster further research on hallucination detection in German.

Automatic sign language processing is gaining popularity in Natural Language Processing (NLP) research (Yin et al., 2021). In machine translation (MT) in particular, sign language translation based on glosses is a prominent approach. In this paper, we review recent works on neural gloss translation. We find that limitations of glosses in general and limitations of specific datasets are not discussed in a transparent manner and that there is no common standard for evaluation. To address these issues, we put forward concrete recommendations for future research on gloss translation. Our suggestions advocate awareness of the inherent limitations of gloss-based approaches, realistic datasets, stronger baselines and convincing evaluation.

With the success of large-scale pre-training and multilingual modeling in Natural Language Processing (NLP), recent years have seen a proliferation of large, web-mined text datasets covering hundreds of languages. However, to date there has been no systematic analysis of the quality of these publicly available datasets, or whether the datasets actually contain content in the languages they claim to represent. In this work, we manually audit the quality of 205 language-specific corpora released with five major public datasets (CCAligned, ParaCrawl, WikiMatrix, OSCAR, mC4), and audit the correctness of language codes in a sixth (JW300). We find that lower-resource corpora have systematic issues: at least 15 corpora are completely erroneous, and a significant fraction contains less than 50% sentences of acceptable quality. Similarly, we find 82 corpora that are mislabeled or use nonstandard/ambiguous language codes. We demonstrate that these issues are easy to detect even for non-speakers of the languages in question, and supplement the human judgements with automatic analyses. Inspired by our analysis, we recommend techniques to evaluate and improve multilingual corpora and discuss the risks that come with low-quality data releases.