arXiv AI

Source-Free MT Evaluation Is Not MT Evaluation

arXiv Computation and Language
3d ago

In the Blind: Building Pseudo-References for MT Evaluation

arXiv:2609.13611v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The WMT26 General MT task evaluates systems on 10 language pairs that have no human references (neither translated from scratch nor post-edited from MT...

By Diptesh Kanojia, Chi-kiu Lo, Archchana Sindhujan, Samuel Larkin, Greg Hanneman, Alon Lavie
arXiv AI
Sep 7

Attributable by Construction: Claim-Anchored Provenance for Multi-Document Summarization

The paper introduces CAMS, a Claim‑Anchored Multi‑Document Summarization framework that decomposes source documents into atomic claims, resolves provenance deterministically from verbatim quotes to token spans, clusters equivalent claims across documents, and rewrites summaries so each sentence ends with claim identifiers linking back to source spans. CAMS separates provenance (an invariant for each emitted sentence) from faithfulness (an objective encouraged by selection, rewriting, and verification). Evaluations on MultiNews, DiverseSumm, and zero‑shot WCEP show that CAMS matches strong baselines in summary quality while improving faithfulness and citation precision, raising attribution accuracy from 38% to 64% and reducing human verification time per claim by 3.4×.

By Shuo Guan
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 1

Beyond "To whom it may concern": Tailoring Machine Translation to Audience and Intent

The paper investigates how machine translation can be tailored to specific audiences and intents, a capability enabled by large language models (LLMs). By systematically evaluating purpose-driven MT across 50 languages, 5 model sizes, and 8 text domains, the authors find that explicit instructions significantly improve translation adaptiveness, especially for informal domains, larger models, and higher-resource languages. They also show that traditional MT metrics often penalize adapted translations and that models can self-generate useful instructions from context, closing a large portion of the adaptiveness gap.

By Raphael Merx, Ekaterina Vylomova, Trevor Cohn
arXiv AI
Sep 7

Beyond Aggregate Scores: Behavioral Correctness Assumptions for Assessing Reference-Based Automatic Evaluation Methods

The paper introduces behavioral correctness assumptions as a new framework for evaluating reference-based automatic evaluation methods in natural language generation. It defines a taxonomy of correctness-preserving and correctness-altering assumptions and operationalizes them through controlled response transformations to specify expected scoring behaviors. The authors evaluate a range of lexical, character-level, semantic, LLM-based, and hybrid evaluators, analyzing their behavior across multiple dimensions and finding that no evaluator satisfies all assumptions, revealing distinct behavioral trade-offs not evident from aggregate scores.

By Maria Mahbub, Ashley Rice, Michael R. Munroe, Amidu Kamara, Amir Sadovnik
arXiv AI
Jul 24

Evaluating and Guarding Citation Faithfulness in Agentic Scientific Synthesis

arXiv:2607. 20527v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic LLM systems such as OpenScholar and PaperQA2 read the scientific literature and return cited answers, and both they and their benchmarks already check whether those citations hold, with a fixed attribution model or human graders.

By Taewan Goo, Junsik Kim, Kyulhee Han, GwonYul Jo, Jong-Soo Kim, Tae-Hyung Kim
arXiv AI
Jun 16

The Faithfulness Gap: Certifying Semantic Equivalence Between Natural-Language and Formal Mathematical Statements

arXiv:2606. 16541v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autoformalization, translating natural-language mathematics into formal proof assistants, is bottlenecked not by translation fluency but by \emph{faithfulness}: a formal statement can typecheck and be provable, yet still encode a different theorem than the source intended.

By Noor Islam S. Mohammad, Tamim Sheikh
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 7

Discourse Dependency: A Continuous Criterion for Translation Difficulty

The paper introduces discourse dependency (DDP) as a continuous measure of translation difficulty based on how far back a segment must look to resolve references. DDP is computed from named entity re‑mentions and pronominal coreference, and is validated against gold coreference with high reliability. Applying DDP to recent WMT benchmarks reveals a bias toward low‑DDP segments, and experiments show that as DDP increases, no current context‑injection strategy matches human post‑editing quality.

By Ahrii Kim, Chanjun Park, Seong-heum Kim