Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userTo Ship or Not to Ship: An Extensive Evaluation of Automatic Metrics for Machine Translation
87
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Tom Kocmi
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Automatic metrics are commonly used as the exclusive tool for declaring the superiority of one machine translation systems quality over another. The community choice of automatic metric guides research directions and industrial developments by deciding which models are deemed better. Evaluating metrics correlations with sets of human judgements has been limited by the size of these sets. In this paper, we corroborate how reliable metrics are in contrast to human judgements on -- to the best of our knowledge -- the largest collection of judgements reported in the literature. Arguably, pairwise rankings of two systems are the most common evaluation tasks in research or deployment scenarios. Taking human judgement as a gold standard, we investigate which metrics have the highest accuracy in predicting translation quality rankings for such system pairs. Furthermore, we evaluate the performance of various metrics across different language pairs and domains. Lastly, we show that the sole use of BLEU impeded the development of improved models leading to bad deployment decisions. We release the collection of 2.3M sentence-level human judgements for 4380 systems for further analysis and replication of our work.
rate research
Read More
Empirical data reveals a broad variety of hull shapes among the different ship categories. We present a minimal theoretical approach to address the problem of ship hull optimisation. We show that optimal hull aspect ratios result -- at given load and propulsive power -- from a subtle balance between wave drag, pressure drag and skin friction. Slender hulls are more favourable in terms of wave drag and pressure drag, while bulky hulls have a smaller wetted surface for a given immersed volume, by that reducing skin friction. We confront our theoretical results to real data and discuss discrepancies in the light of hull designer constraints, such as stability or manoeuvrability.
The high-quality translation results produced by machine translation (MT) systems still pose a huge challenge for automatic evaluation. Current MT evaluation pays the same attention to each sentence component, while the questions of real-world examinations (e.g., university examinations) have different difficulties and weightings. In this paper, we propose a novel difficulty-aware MT evaluation metric, expanding the evaluation dimension by taking translation difficulty into consideration. A translation that fails to be predicted by most MT systems will be treated as a difficult one and assigned a large weight in the final score function, and conversely. Experimental results on the WMT19 English-German Metrics shared tasks show that our proposed method outperforms commonly used MT metrics in terms of human correlation. In particular, our proposed method performs well even when all the MT systems are very competitive, which is when most existing metrics fail to distinguish between them. The source code is freely available at https://github.com/NLP2CT/Difficulty-Aware-MT-Evaluation.
Several neural-based metrics have been recently proposed to evaluate machine translation quality. However, all of them resort to point estimates, which provide limited information at segment level. This is made worse as they are trained on noisy, biased and scarce human judgements, often resulting in unreliable quality predictions. In this paper, we introduce uncertainty-aware MT evaluation and analyze the trustworthiness of the predicted quality. We combine the COMET framework with two uncertainty estimation methods, Monte Carlo dropout and deep ensembles, to obtain quality scores along with confidence intervals. We compare the performance of our uncertainty-aware MT evaluation methods across multiple language pairs from the QT21 dataset and the WMT20 metrics task, augmented with MQM annotations. We experiment with varying numbers of references and further discuss the usefulness of uncertainty-aware quality estimation (without references) to flag possibly critical translation mistakes.
Precise and efficient automated identification of Gastrointestinal (GI) tract diseases can help doctors treat more patients and improve the rate of disease detection and identification. Currently, automatic analysis of diseases in the GI tract is a hot topic in both computer science and medical-related journals. Nevertheless, the evaluation of such an automatic analysis is often incomplete or simply wrong. Algorithms are often only tested on small and biased datasets, and cross-dataset evaluations are rarely performed. A clear understanding of evaluation metrics and machine learning models with cross datasets is crucial to bring research in the field to a new quality level. Towards this goal, we present comprehensive evaluations of five distinct machine learning models using Global Features and Deep Neural Networks that can classify 16 different key types of GI tract conditions, including pathological findings, anatomical landmarks, polyp removal conditions, and normal findings from images captured by common GI tract examination instruments. In our evaluation, we introduce performance hexagons using six performance metrics such as recall, precision, specificity, accuracy, F1-score, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient to demonstrate how to determine the real capabilities of models rather than evaluating them shallowly. Furthermore, we perform cross-dataset evaluations using different datasets for training and testing. With these cross-dataset evaluations, we demonstrate the challenge of actually building a generalizable model that could be used across different hospitals. Our experiments clearly show that more sophisticated performance metrics and evaluation methods need to be applied to get reliable models rather than depending on evaluations of the splits of the same dataset, i.e., the performance metrics should always be interpreted together rather than relying on a single metric.
Neural machine translation (NMT) models are conventionally trained with token-level negative log-likelihood (NLL), which does not guarantee that the generated translations will be optimized for a selected sequence-level evaluation metric. Multiple approaches are proposed to train NMT with BLEU as the reward, in order to directly improve the metric. However, it was reported that the gain in BLEU does not translate to real quality improvement, limiting the application in industry. Recently, it became clear to the community that BLEU has a low correlation with human judgment when dealing with state-of-the-art models. This leads to the emerging of model-based evaluation metrics. These new metrics are shown to have a much higher human correlation. In this paper, we investigate whether it is beneficial to optimize NMT models with the state-of-the-art model-based metric, BLEURT. We propose a contrastive-margin loss for fast and stable reward optimization suitable for large NMT models. In experiments, we perform automatic and human evaluations to compare models trained with smoothed BLEU and BLEURT to the baseline models. Results show that the reward optimization with BLEURT is able to increase the metric scores by a large margin, in contrast to limited gain when training with smoothed BLEU. The human evaluation shows that models trained with BLEURT improve adequacy and coverage of translations. Code is available via https://github.com/naver-ai/MetricMT.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
