Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Bangla-Bayanno aims to be the reference Bengali visual question answering benchmark: 52,650 question-answer pairs over 4,750+ images, produced by an LLM-assisted translation refinement of VQA v2.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

A 52,650-pair Bengali VQA dataset built by translating VQA v2 with GPT-4, claimed as the largest open-source Bangla benchmark but weakly validated.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-05 challenge →

load-bearing objection A large, honestly-documented Bengali VQA dataset translated from VQA v2, but the 'high-quality' claim rests on 20 self-rated examples; worth refereeing, not yet citable as a benchmark. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2508.19887 v1 pith:MTVLKDVE submitted 2025-08-27 cs.CL cs.CV

Bangla-Bayanno: A 52K-Pair Bengali Visual Question Answering Dataset with LLM-Assisted Translation Refinement

Mohammed Rakibul Hasan , Rafi Majid , Ahanaf Tahmid This is my paper
classification cs.CL cs.CV
keywords Bangla-Bayannovisual question answeringBengali languagelow-resource multimodal learningLLM-assisted translationtranslation refinementVQA v2open-ended QA dataset
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper introduces Bangla-Bayanno, a Bengali visual question answering (VQA) dataset of 52,650 question-answer pairs drawn from 4,750+ images of the English VQA v2 benchmark. Its central claim is that this is the most comprehensive open-source, high-quality VQA benchmark in Bangla, about three times larger in question-answer pairs than the next largest existing Bengali dataset and the only one spanning nominal, quantitative, and polar answer types. Rather than manual annotation, the corpus is produced by a GPT-4-assisted translation and refinement pipeline designed to avoid the errors of manual Excel-style translations and the superficiality of generic machine translation. If the claim holds, it gives researchers working on Bangla — spoken by over 230 million people — a standard evaluation ground for low-resource multimodal AI, plus a cheap, reusable recipe for building similar benchmarks in other under-served languages.

Core claim

The paper's discovery is that a large, high-quality Bangla VQA dataset can be built by taking balanced English VQA v2 image-question pairs, translating each pair individually through a carefully prompted GPT-4 deployment, and structuring the output into a JSON corpus with per-pair answer-type labels (polar, numeric, descriptive). The resulting Bangla-Bayanno delivers 52,650 QA pairs over 4,750+ images, released in category-specific and full variants. On a 20-question human evaluation, the authors report, its translations outscore both manual Excel-style translation and a baseline machine translation tool, typically reaching the highest rating. The authors position the dataset as the largest

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the LLM-assisted translation refinement pipeline. Each English VQA v2 question-answer pair is serialized into structured JSON, sent through a single-pair prompt to GPT-4 for translation and refinement, and stored back in the same schema with an answer-type label. Processing pairs one at a time rather than in batches is what the authors credit with suppressing group noise and letting the model fix unnatural syntax and literal machine-translation artifacts. The dataset's organizing taxonomy is the three answer types — polar (yes/no), quantitative (numeric), and nominal (descriptive) — which structure both the release variants and the benchmark's intended evaluations.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that the dataset is high-quality depends on GPT-4's Bengali translations preserving the meaning of each English question and answer so that the original VQA v2 answer is still correct for the image — yet that correctness was checked by humans on only 20 of the 52,650 pairs.

What would settle it

Take a random sample of about 300 QA pairs from the released dataset, have two independent fluent Bengali speakers answer each question from the paired image without seeing the provided answer, and measure agreement with the dataset's answer; if agreement falls well short of the level humans reach on the same images, or if even a few percent of translated questions are judged to have changed meaning, the 'high-quality' claim is falsified. Repeating the audit on nominal answers alone would expose the acknowledged residue of untranslated source-language terms.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Bangla-Bayanno gives VQA researchers a benchmark roughly three times larger in question-answer pairs than the next largest existing Bengali dataset (BVQA, about 17,800), and it is the only one covering three answer types.
  • Because it is a direct translation of VQA v2's balanced pairs, models evaluated on it inherit a design built to counter the language-prior problem, so accuracy gains should reflect visual grounding rather than question text alone.
  • The reported $110–130 cost to build the full corpus means the same pipeline is affordable for other teams and other low-resource languages.
  • The category-specific releases (polar, numeric, descriptive) allow targeted evaluation: counting errors, yes/no bias, and entity recognition can each be studied separately.
  • The dataset is positioned as the reference open benchmark for future Bangla VQA model development, giving the community a common evaluation ground where none existed.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The quality claim currently rests on a 20-example human evaluation, while the authors themselves note that some translations keep source-language terminology; a random-sample audit of a few hundred pairs would show whether these residuals concentrate in nominal (entity-name) answers, where they would most corrupt evaluation.
  • Because the questions mirror VQA v2, the known answer distribution (for example, the dominance of 'yes'/'no' in polar questions) likely carries over; an always-majority-answer baseline on the polar subset would quantify how much headroom remains beyond language priors.
  • The pipeline is transferable as-is: applying the same prompt-and-refine recipe to GQA, VizWiz, or other English VQA sources would yield comparable benchmarks in other low-resource languages, enabling cross-lingual VQA comparison.
  • A cheap internal consistency check is round-trip translation (Bangla back to English) on a sample; large semantic drift on any answer type would pinpoint where the refinement step is still losing information.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper introduces Bangla-Bayanno, a Bengali VQA dataset built by translating and refining 52,650 question–answer pairs from VQA v2 covering 4,750+ images. The pipeline sequentially sends each QA pair to a ChatGPT-4 model via Azure with a crafted prompt, then aggregates results into categorized subsets (polar, quantitative, nominal) released on Hugging Face. The paper reports answer-type distributions, a 20-question translation-quality evaluation, a comparison with existing Bangla VQA datasets, and a cost estimate. The central claim is that Bangla-Bayanno is the largest and highest-quality open-source Bangla VQA benchmark.

Significance. If the quality claim holds, the dataset would be a substantial contribution to low-resource multimodal research: it is roughly three times larger in QA count than the largest prior Bangla VQA dataset, includes multiple answer types, and is publicly available in a structured, documented format. The LLM-assisted refinement pipeline is a reproducible strategy for scaling VQA datasets to low-resource languages. However, the evidence for 'high-quality' is currently a 20-item self-assessment with no inter-annotator agreement and no ground-truth verification, so the benchmark's reliability as an evaluation resource is not yet established. The paper's public release and workflow documentation are strengths; the validation section needs to be brought up to the standard of the dataset's claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [IV.B] The entire 'high-quality' assertion rests on a 20-question human evaluation (Section IV.B, Table III). The text says 'multiple group members' scored translations but gives no number of annotators, no inter-annotator agreement, no variance, and no confidence interval. More importantly, the scoring rubric (Table III) measures fluency and meaning preservation, not whether the translated answer is still correct for the image. Since the dataset's purpose is VQA benchmarking, an answer that is fluent but wrong for the image is a broken benchmark item. Please add (i) a larger, stratified evaluation sample (e.g., by answer type), (ii) independent annotators with reported agreement, and (iii) an explicit check that the Bangla answer matches the image (e.g., by showing the image to annotators or by back-translation plus visual validation).
  2. [Conclusion; Section III.C] The Conclusion admits 'some translations preserve source-language terminology without complete modification,' and Section III.C notes 'occasional incorrect interpretation of numerical values' were 'rigorously rectified.' These concessions directly undercut the blanket 'high-quality' claim, as terminology leakage can change spatial, negation, or numeric readings and thereby invalidate the VQA v2 ground-truth answer. The paper does not quantify how many examples are affected, which items were manually corrected, or how the correction was verified. Please provide an error analysis on a representative sample and describe the rectification protocol in enough detail to be reproduced.
  3. [III.B; V] Section III.B states the pipeline used 'Microsoft Azure's deployment of ChatGPT-4,' while Section V computes cost with the 'GPT-4o model' and quotes GPT-4o pricing. This inconsistency matters because translation quality varies by model version. Please state exactly which model (including snapshot/version) produced the released dataset and align the cost estimate accordingly.
  4. [IV.C] The comparative discussion in Section IV.C and Figure 8 supports only the size claim; it does not demonstrate that Bangla-Bayanno is 'linguistically robust' or otherwise superior in quality to prior datasets. Since the paper positions the dataset as a benchmark, a small set of model baselines (e.g., a fine-tuned multilingual VQA model evaluated on the release variants) or a human agreement study on the final dataset would substantiate the benchmark claim. This is not strictly required for a dataset paper, but in light of the central 'high-quality' assertion it is recommended.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 4; Fig. 5] Figures 4 and 5, referenced as the prompt template and the post-translation JSON schema, are not visible/legible in the submitted manuscript. Please ensure the actual figures are included and readable.
  2. [Table IV] The text says 'shown in the Fig. IV' but then lists 'Table IV: Translation quality evaluation across 20 questions using Heatmap.' This label inconsistency should be fixed, and the heatmap itself must be included.
  3. [III.A.2] The claim that 'statistical validation ensured balanced coverage across the three answer categories' is contradicted by Figures 6–7, which show an imbalanced distribution (49.9% nominal, 37.6% polar, 12.4% quantitative). Reword to 'coverage' or explain the balancing criterion.
  4. [Throughout] Several typographical errors and non-standard glyphs appear, e.g., 'efficacy', 'official', 'insufficient'. A careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; dataset construction is grounded in external VQA v2 data and external LLM translation, with only minor self-assessment limitations.

full rationale

Bangla-Bayanno is a dataset-construction paper, not a derivation. The central claim of comprehensiveness is an empirical comparison of QA-pair counts (Tables II and V) against other datasets, grounded in a random subset of VQA v2 translated via Microsoft Azure's ChatGPT-4. There is no fitted parameter, no equation, and no 'prediction' that reduces to an input. The quality claim rests on a 20-example self-administered evaluation (Section IV.B, Tables III and IV), which is an evidence-quality weakness rather than circularity: the rating criteria measure translation fluency and meaning preservation relative to the English source, and answer correctness is inherited from VQA v2, not from the authors' ratings. The conclusion's caveat that 'some translations preserve source-language terminology without complete modification' is an honest limitation, and the Section III.B 'ChatGPT-4' vs Section V 'GPT-4o' inconsistency is a documentation issue, not a circular step. No self-citation chain, uniqueness theorem, or ansatz-smuggling is present. Hence no circularity is found.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on three domain assumptions: that VQA v2 is a valid source, that GPT-4 translations preserve meaning reliably, and that a 20-question manual review generalizes to the full 52,650-pair dataset. No free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (3)
  • domain assumption VQA v2 question-answer pairs are correctly aligned with images and form a valid source for translation.
    Section III.A.1 states the dataset is based on VQA v2, inheriting its quality without independent verification.
  • domain assumption GPT-4 produces Bengali translations that preserve meaning and answer correctness without per-item human verification.
    Section III.B relies on GPT-4 and cites [24]; only 20 translated items were manually scored.
  • ad hoc to paper The 20-question human evaluation generalizes to the full dataset.
    Section IV.B: translation quality is judged on q1-q20 only; no confidence intervals or inter-rater agreement reported.

reviewed 2026-08-05 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bangla-Bayanno: A 52K-Pair Bengali Visual Question Answering Dataset with LLM-Assisted Translation Refinement." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MTVLKDVE

@misc{pith2026250819887,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bangla-Bayanno: A 52K-Pair Bengali Visual Question Answering Dataset with LLM-Assisted Translation Refinement},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MTVLKDVE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.19887}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

In this paper, we introduce Bangla-Bayanno, an open-ended Visual Question Answering (VQA) Dataset in Bangla, a widely used, low-resource language in multimodal AI research. The majority of existing datasets are either manually annotated with an emphasis on a specific domain, query type, or answer type or are constrained by niche answer formats. In order to mitigate human-induced errors and guarantee lucidity, we implemented a multilingual LLM-assisted translation refinement pipeline. This dataset overcomes the issues of low-quality translations from multilingual sources. The dataset comprises 52,650 question-answer pairs across 4750+ images. Questions are classified into three distinct answer types: nominal (short descriptive), quantitative (numeric), and polar (yes/no). Bangla-Bayanno provides the most comprehensive open-source, high-quality VQA benchmark in Bangla, aiming to advance research in low-resource multimodal learning and facilitate the development of more inclusive AI systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.19887 by Ahanaf Tahmid, Mohammed Rakibul Hasan, Rafi Majid.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Examples from the Bangla-Bayanno dataset. Each instance includes an image, a corresponding question in Bangla, and an answer. The examples represent the three distinct answer types: (a) Polar (yes/no), (b) Quantitative (numeric), and (c) Nominal (descriptive). Bangla-Bayanno is the most extensive open-source VQA benchmark in Bangla, comprising three distinct QA categories, is released to address this chall… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Workflow diagram of the Bangla-Bayanno. to enhance the quality of translations. This refinement layer systematically resolves syntactic awkwardness and semantic ambiguity in Bangla queries and answers, resulting in translations that are more precise, scalable, and fluent across thousands of instances. The adaptability of LLMs as practical tools for constructing robust, high-quality multilingual multimodal … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Example JSON schema from the dataset. Each entry was structured into a unified JSON [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Prompt template used in the Bangla-Bayanno. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Example JSON schema after translation. 3) Monolithic Bangla Question-Answering Dataset: Following to the preliminary translation phase, each question-answer pair endured to a large language model (LLM) to guarantee syntactic fluency, semantic precision, and contextual coherence in Bangla as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Percentage of QA Pairs by Answer Type [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Number of QA Pairs by Answer Type. The dataset analysis indicates a clear compositional structure, as outlined in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of Bengali VQA Datasets by the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. BanglaWild: An In-the-Wild Bengali Scene Text Recognition Benchmark for OCR and Vision-Language Models

    cs.CV 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0

    BANGLAWILD is the first in-the-wild Bengali scene text benchmark with dual verbatim/standard labels, and its evaluation shows visual mis-recognition dominates errors while conjunct-related errors are nearly closed.

  2. GSM-Plus-BN: A Perturbation-Based Benchmark for Bangla Mathematical Reasoning in Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0

    The paper releases GSM-Plus-BN, a human-verified Bengali translation of the GSM-Plus perturbed math benchmark, and reports accuracy baselines for six open LLMs under standard and CoT prompting.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Vqa: Visual question answering,

    S. Antol, A. Agrawal, J. Lu, M. Mitchell, D. Batra, C. L. Zitnick, and D. Parikh, “Vqa: Visual question answering,” in Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision , 2015, pp. 2425–2433

    2015

  2. [2]

    Gqa: A new dataset for real-world visual reasoning and compositional question answering,

    D. A. Hudson and C. D. Manning, “Gqa: A new dataset for real-world visual reasoning and compositional question answering,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 2019, pp. 6700–6709

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Vizwiz: nearly real-time answers to visual questions,

    J. P. Bigham, C. Jayant, H. Ji, G. Little, A. Miller, R. C. Miller, R. Miller, A. Tatarowicz, B. White, S. White et al. , “Vizwiz: nearly real-time answers to visual questions,” in Proceedings of the 23nd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, 2010, pp. 333–342

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    Making the v in vqa matter: Elevating the role of image understanding in visual question answering,

    Y. Goyal, T. Khot, D. Summers-Stay, D. Batra, and D. Parikh, “Making the v in vqa matter: Elevating the role of image understanding in visual question answering,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2017, pp. 6904–6913

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    Low Resource Neural Machine Translation: A Benchmark for Five African Languages

    S. M. Lakew, M. Negri, and M. Turchi, “Low resource neural machine translation: A benchmark for five african languages,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.14402 , 2020

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  6. [6]

    Towards making the most of chatgpt for machine translation,

    K. Peng, L. Ding, Q. Zhong, L. Shen, X. Liu, M. Zhang, Y. Ouyang, and D. Tao, “Towards making the most of chatgpt for machine translation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.13780 , 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Bengalivqa: A benchmark dataset for bengali visual question answering,

    S. M. S. Hasan, S. Islam, M. H. Rafi, S. M. H. I. Labib, and F. M. Shah, “Bengalivqa: A benchmark dataset for bengali visual question answering,” 2025. [Online]. A vailable: https://doi.org/10.17632/y9fw6k37n9.1

    work page doi:10.17632/y9fw6k37n9.1 2025

  8. [8]

    Chitrojera: A regionally relevant visual question answering dataset for bangla,

    D. D. Barua, M. S. U. R. Sourove, M. Fahim, F. Haider, F. T. Shifat, M. T. R. Adib, A. B. Uddin, M. F. Ishmam, and M. F. Alam, “Chitrojera: A regionally relevant visual question answering dataset for bangla,” 2025. [Online]. A vailable: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.14991

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Med-vqa_bn_overall,

    SHRemon97, “Med-vqa_bn_overall,” https://huggingface.co/ datasets/SHRemon97/Med-VQA_Bn_Overall, 2023, accessed: 2025-08-24

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Bvqa: Connecting language and vision through multimodal attention for open-ended question answering,

    M. S. M. Bhuyan, E. Hossain, K. Akhter Sathi, M. A. Hossain, and M. A. A. Dewan, “Bvqa: Connecting language and vision through multimodal attention for open-ended question answering,” 2025, approximately 17,800 open-ended QA pairs over ￿3,500 images, generated via LLM

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    Vqa bengali 1.0: A contrastive loss–based bengali visual question answering dataset,

    M. T. Zaman, M. Y. Zaman, F. M. Shah, and E. A. Mahi, “Vqa bengali 1.0: A contrastive loss–based bengali visual question answering dataset,” 2024, 1,864 images with 3,728 yes/no QA pairs; contrastive loss improves model accuracy to 93.2%

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate,

    D. Bahdanau, K. Cho, and Y. Bengio, “Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.0473, 2014

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  13. [13]

    Survey of low-resource machine translation,

    B. Haddow, R. Bawden, A. V. Miceli Barone, J. Helcl, and A. Birch, “Survey of low-resource machine translation,” Computational Linguistics , vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 673–732, Sep

    work page

  14. [14]

    Neural machine translation for low-resource languages: A survey,

    S. Ranathunga, E.-S. A. Lee, M. Prifti Skenduli, R. Shekhar, M. Alam, and R. Kaur, “Neural machine translation for low-resource languages: A survey,” ACM Computing Surveys , vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 1–37, 2023

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    Banglatense: A large-scale dataset of bangla sentences categorized by tense,

    M. Karim et al. , “Banglatense: A large-scale dataset of bangla sentences categorized by tense,” in Proceedings of the 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference , 2021, pp. 6242–6248

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    Reachability Constrained Reinforcement Learning

    A. Bhattacharjee et al. , “Banglablend: A dataset for bangla in formal and informal registers with english translations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.07536, 2022

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  17. [17]

    Creating an efficient parallel corpus for bangla-english statistical machine translation,

    Z. Islam et al. , “Creating an efficient parallel corpus for bangla-english statistical machine translation,” in Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), 2010, pp. 2191–2197

    work page 2010

  18. [18]

    Language models are few-shot learners,

    T. B. Brown, B. Mann, N. Ryder, M. Subbiah, J. D. Kaplan, P. Dhariwal, A. Neelakantan, P. Shyam, G. Sastry, A. Askell, and et al., “Language models are few-shot learners,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , vol. 33, pp. 1877–1901, 2020

    work page 1901

  19. [19]

    (2023) Gpt-4 technical report

    OpenAI. (2023) Gpt-4 technical report. Accessed: 2025-08-23. [Online]. A vailable: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.08774

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [20]

    (2022) Introducing chatgpt

    ——. (2022) Introducing chatgpt. Accessed: 2025-08-23. [Online]. A vailable: https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    Is chatgpt a good machine translator? yes with gpt-4 as the engine,

    W. Jiao, X. Wang, S. Huang, and et al., “Is chatgpt a good machine translator? yes with gpt-4 as the engine,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.08745, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  22. [22]

    Prefixes of the Fibonacci word

    J. Zhang, X. Li, B. Chen, and et al., “Do large language models help machine translation? a comprehensive evaluation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04640, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Multimodal learning for accurate visual question answering,

    A. Das et al., “Multimodal learning for accurate visual question answering,” arXiv preprint, 2023, details on the MSCOCO VQA v2 dataset: 265K images and 1.1M Q–A pairs

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    Gpt-4 vs. human translators: A comprehensive evaluation of translation quality across languages, domains, and expertise levels,

    J. Yan, P. Yan, Y. Chen, J. Li, X. Zhu, and Y. Zhang, “Gpt-4 vs. human translators: A comprehensive evaluation of translation quality across languages, domains, and expertise levels,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.03658, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [2022]

    A vailable: https://aclanthology.org/2022.cl-3.6/

    [Online]. A vailable: https://aclanthology.org/2022.cl-3.6/

    work page 2022

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 5, 2026.