Pith. sign in

REVIEW

With a Little Help from the Authors: Reproducing Human Evaluation of an MT Error Detector

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2308.06527 v1 pith:OV7G3DKQ submitted 2023-08-12 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords humanauthorsevaluationhighoriginalreproducingresultssome
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

This work presents our efforts to reproduce the results of the human evaluation experiment presented in the paper of Vamvas and Sennrich (2022), which evaluated an automatic system detecting over- and undertranslations (translations containing more or less information than the original) in machine translation (MT) outputs. Despite the high quality of the documentation and code provided by the authors, we discuss some problems we found in reproducing the exact experimental setup and offer recommendations for improving reproducibility. Our replicated results generally confirm the conclusions of the original study, but in some cases, statistically significant differences were observed, suggesting a high variability of human annotation.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools