arXiv AI

The Role of Prompt Language and Translation-Theory-Driven Prompts in Large Language Models: A Case Study on Spanish-Chinese Journalistic Translation

arXiv:2607. 03160v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This study examines how prompt language and translation theory-driven prompt design influence the quality of Spanish-Chinese journalistic translations generated by GPT-5.

arXiv AI
Aug 28

Investigating the Influence of Prompt and Response Languages on LLM Content Generation

The paper investigates how the language of prompts and responses affects large language model (LLM) outputs. Using five models and 68 non‑translation questions, the authors compare English‑to‑English, English‑to‑Norwegian, Norwegian‑to‑Norwegian, and Norwegian‑to‑English conditions, yielding 1,348 responses after filtering. They find that prompt language strongly influences response length—Norwegian prompts shorten English outputs by ~37 % and English prompts shorten Norwegian outputs by ~41 %—while semantic similarity remains high across conditions.

By Thi Thanh Nhan Nguyen, Mai Khoi Tieu, Michael A. Riegler, P{\aa}l Halvorsen, Thu Nguyen
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 16

EviSI: An Evidence-Based Evaluation Agent for Simultaneous Interpreting

EviSI is an evidence‑based evaluation agent for low‑latency simultaneous speech‑to‑speech translation. It combines Multidimensional Quality Metrics with interpreter‑developed criteria, using shared source evidence to assess four dimensions—Anchor, Event, Logic, and Fluency—while deduplicating verified errors before scoring. On English‑to‑Chinese and Chinese‑to‑English data, EviSI’s rankings correlate strongly with human judgments, outperforming BLEU and COMET, and its multilingual extension maintains these correlations across five language directions.

By Ben Yan, Zongyao Li, Xiaoyu Chen, Daimeng Wei, Weidong Liu, Huan Zhao, Chong Li, Yaode Wang, Yuzhe Shang
arXiv AI
Sep 3

Evaluating the Evaluator: Summarization Metrics and LLM-Judges beyond English

The paper introduces BASSE, a multilingual meta‑evaluation dataset containing 2,040 human‑rated abstractive summaries produced manually or by five LLMs with four prompts. Annotators scored each summary on coherence, consistency, fluency, relevance, and 5W1H using a 5‑point Likert scale. Benchmarking shows proprietary LLM‑judge models best align with human judgments, followed by criteria‑specific automatic metrics, while open‑source judge LLMs perform poorly.

By Jeremy Barnes, Naiara Perez, Alba Bonet-Jover, Bego\~na Altuna
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 21

Benchmarking Gender Bias in Machine Translation Evaluation Metrics across Occupations

The paper investigates gender bias in machine translation evaluation metrics using an occupation-balanced subset of GAMBIT+ across seven English‑source language pairs, including a new German extension. It finds that masculine translations tend to receive higher scores and that biases align with stereotypical gender representations, though the strength varies by evaluator and language. The study highlights that assessing bias requires multiple dimensions beyond a single aggregate measure.

By Orfeas Menis Mastromichalakis, Giorgos Filandrianos, Wafaa Mohammed, Giuseppe Attanasio, Chrysoula Zerva
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 18

Evaluating Communicative Success in Machine-Translated Conversation

The paper introduces a three‑layer checklist-and-judge framework to evaluate interpreter agents that mediate live conversation across languages. It assesses semantic, pragmatic, and cultural‑social dimensions—naturalness, intent, and social appropriateness—rather than just fidelity, in both single‑turn and multi‑turn settings. Extensive validation shows that conventional MT metrics miss failures in stronger interpreters, and that context, structured instructions, and cultural cues influence communicative success.

By Faiz Ghifari Haznitrama, Alice Oh