A Multi-task Learning Framework for Evaluating Machine Translation of Emotion-loaded User-generated Content

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.03277v1
• Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 09:49:57 GMT
• Title: A Multi-task Learning Framework for Evaluating Machine Translation of Emotion-loaded User-generated Content
• Authors: Shenbin Qian, Constantin Orăsan, Diptesh Kanojia, Félix do Carmo,
• Abstract summary: Machine translation of user-generated content (UGC) poses unique challenges, including handling slang, emotion, and literary devices like irony and sarcasm. We utilize an existing emotion-related dataset that includes emotion labels and human-annotated translation errors. We extend it with sentence-level evaluation scores and word-level labels, leading to a dataset suitable for sentence- and word-level translation evaluation and emotion classification.
• Score: 6.213698466889738
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Machine translation (MT) of user-generated content (UGC) poses unique challenges, including handling slang, emotion, and literary devices like irony and sarcasm. Evaluating the quality of these translations is challenging as current metrics do not focus on these ubiquitous features of UGC. To address this issue, we utilize an existing emotion-related dataset that includes emotion labels and human-annotated translation errors based on Multi-dimensional Quality Metrics. We extend it with sentence-level evaluation scores and word-level labels, leading to a dataset suitable for sentence- and word-level translation evaluation and emotion classification, in a multi-task setting. We propose a new architecture to perform these tasks concurrently, with a novel combined loss function, which integrates different loss heuristics, like the Nash and Aligned losses. Our evaluation compares existing fine-tuning and multi-task learning approaches, assessing generalization with ablative experiments over multiple datasets. Our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance and we present a comprehensive analysis for MT evaluation of UGC.

Related papers

• UniSumEval: Towards Unified, Fine-Grained, Multi-Dimensional Summarization Evaluation for LLMs [19.097842830790405]
  Existing benchmarks for summarization quality evaluation often lack diverse input scenarios and focus on narrowly defined dimensions. We create UniSumEval benchmark, which extends the range of input context and provides fine-grained, multi-dimensional annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-30T02:56:35Z)
• Machine Translation Meta Evaluation through Translation Accuracy Challenge Sets [92.38654521870444]
  We introduce ACES, a contrastive challenge set spanning 146 language pairs. This dataset aims to discover whether metrics can identify 68 translation accuracy errors. We conduct a large-scale study by benchmarking ACES on 50 metrics submitted to the WMT 2022 and 2023 metrics shared tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-29T17:17:42Z)
• DecompEval: Evaluating Generated Texts as Unsupervised Decomposed Question Answering [95.89707479748161]
  Existing evaluation metrics for natural language generation (NLG) tasks face the challenges on generalization ability and interpretability. We propose a metric called DecompEval that formulates NLG evaluation as an instruction-style question answering task. We decompose our devised instruction-style question about the quality of generated texts into the subquestions that measure the quality of each sentence. The subquestions with their answers generated by PLMs are then recomposed as evidence to obtain the evaluation result.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-13T16:16:51Z)
• Evaluation of Chinese-English Machine Translation of Emotion-Loaded Microblog Texts: A Human Annotated Dataset for the Quality Assessment of Emotion Translation [7.858458986992082]
  In this paper, we focus on how current Machine Translation (MT) tools perform on the translation of emotion-loaded texts. We propose this evaluation framework based on the Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) and perform a detailed error analysis of the MT outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-20T21:22:45Z)
• MISMATCH: Fine-grained Evaluation of Machine-generated Text with Mismatch Error Types [68.76742370525234]
  We propose a new evaluation scheme to model human judgments in 7 NLP tasks, based on the fine-grained mismatches between a pair of texts. Inspired by the recent efforts in several NLP tasks for fine-grained evaluation, we introduce a set of 13 mismatch error types. We show that the mismatch errors between the sentence pairs on the held-out datasets from 7 NLP tasks align well with the human evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-18T01:38:53Z)
• Extrinsic Evaluation of Machine Translation Metrics [78.75776477562087]
  It is unclear if automatic metrics are reliable at distinguishing good translations from bad translations at the sentence level. We evaluate the segment-level performance of the most widely used MT metrics (chrF, COMET, BERTScore, etc.) on three downstream cross-lingual tasks. Our experiments demonstrate that all metrics exhibit negligible correlation with the extrinsic evaluation of the downstream outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-20T14:39:58Z)
• Understanding the Impact of UGC Specificities on Translation Quality [6.123324869194193]
  This work takes a critical look at the evaluation of user-generated content automatic translation. measuring the average-case performance using a standard metric on a test set falls far short of giving a reliable image of the translation quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-24T23:25:29Z)
• When Does Translation Require Context? A Data-driven, Multilingual Exploration [71.43817945875433]
  proper handling of discourse significantly contributes to the quality of machine translation (MT) Recent works in context-aware MT attempt to target a small set of discourse phenomena during evaluation. We develop the Multilingual Discourse-Aware benchmark, a series of taggers that identify and evaluate model performance on discourse phenomena.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-15T17:29:30Z)
• Curious Case of Language Generation Evaluation Metrics: A Cautionary Tale [52.663117551150954]
  A few popular metrics remain as the de facto metrics to evaluate tasks such as image captioning and machine translation. This is partly due to ease of use, and partly because researchers expect to see them and know how to interpret them. In this paper, we urge the community for more careful consideration of how they automatically evaluate their models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-26T13:57:20Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.