The paper explores how to improve literary machine translation by using datasets that contain multiple valid translations of the same source text. It introduces a filtering framework that selects source texts whose references show meaningful variation while staying faithful, based on semantic similarity. Experiments show that fine‑tuning on medium to high similarity data outperforms low similarity data, and that using only this filtered subset can match or exceed performance achieved with the full unfiltered set. Additionally, the study compares synthetic translations generated by large language models with human expert translations, finding that fine‑tuning on human expert data yields better results in both automatic metrics and human evaluations, underscoring the continued importance of expert translations for literary MT.
arXiv:2606. 05924v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Literary translation poses unique challenges due to the scarcity of high-quality annotated data and the need to balance expression fluency with literary effect.
arXiv:2509. 07829v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Literary translation has recently gained attention as a distinct and complex task in machine translation research, yet translation by small open models remains an open problem, particularly for low-resource languages such as Romanian.
arXiv:2606. 05444v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Coreference resolution is a core NLP task, having a broad range of downstream applications, e.
The paper introduces Loci Similes, a benchmark for detecting intertextual links in Latin literature. It provides a curated dataset of about 176,000 text segments and 1,490 expert-verified parallels, including 945 labeled references from an existing source. Baselines for retrieval and classification are established using both lexical methods and pretrained encoder language models.
The paper investigates how machine‑translated English data from 24 diverse source languages influences small English language models. It finds that source language affects model behavior: lexical diversity drives overall perplexity, while grammatical performance correlates with typological similarity to English when sufficient data is used. Additionally, translation quality strongly predicts language‑modeling performance.
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.
arXiv:2512. 07540v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Error Span Detection (ESD) extends automatic machine translation (MT) evaluation by localizing translation errors and labeling their severity.
TranslatePsy-AfriSLM is an open‑source machine‑translation resource set for 19 Sub‑Saharan African languages, comprising curated parallel data, African‑specialized synthetic data, and a family of fine‑tuned small language models (SLMs). The authors demonstrate that a unified quality‑estimation filtering can remove up to 96% of training tokens without harming quality, and that filtered synthetic data dominates the quality‑efficiency Pareto frontier. Models trained on this mixture outperform much larger systems such as TranslateGemma‑27B and Qwen3.5‑122B‑A10B, achieving superior performance with as few as 0.8 B parameters.
IDEAlign introduces a new protocol for evaluating the similarity of large language model (LLM) annotations to expert judgments. It uses pick‑the‑odd‑one‑out tasks to capture expert similarity and benchmarks various similarity methods—including text embeddings, topic models, and LLM-as-a-judge—against these human ratings. Applied to educational datasets, the study finds that most metrics miss nuanced expert dimensions, with LLM-as-a-judge performing best yet still insufficient for full expert alignment.
The paper introduces a register-aware framework to evaluate how human-like large language models (LLMs) are, focusing on linguistic feature distributions rather than factual correctness. It uses Maximum Mean Discrepancy (MMD) and 67 Biber lexico‑grammatical features to compare LLM‑generated texts with human reference corpora across different registers. Experiments on seven instruction‑tuned, open‑source models across five English datasets show that all LLMs deviate from human baselines, with closeness to human language varying by register and not by model size.
arXiv:2608.03446v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multilingual large language models (LLMs) have been shown to perform better on non-English classification tasks when the representations of the giv...
arXiv:2608. 08283v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Although large language models can translate some historical languages surprisingly well, their usefulness in digital humanities workflows is limited by the lack of reliable evaluation.