This document describes the submission of the very first version of the Occiglot open-source large language model to the General MT Shared Task of the 9th Conference of Machine Translation (WMT24). Occiglot is an open-source, community-based LLM based on Mistral-7B, which went through language-specific continual pre-training and subsequent instruction tuning, including instructions relevant to machine translation.We examine the automatic metric scores for translating the WMT24 test set and provide a detailed linguistically-motivated analysis.Despite Occiglot performing worse than many of the other system submissions, we observe that it performs better than Mistral7B, which has been based upon, which indicates the positive effect of the language specific continual-pretraining and instruction tuning. We see the submission of this very early version of the model as a motivation to unite community forces and pursue future LLM research on the translation task.

This paper summarizes the results of our test suite evaluation on 39 machine translation systems submitted at the Shared Task of the Ninth Conference of Machine Translation (WMT24). It offers a fine-grained linguistic evaluation of machine translation outputs for English–German and English–Russian, resulting from significant manual linguistic effort. Based on our results, LLMs are inferior to NMT in English–German, both in overall scores and when translating specific linguistic phenomena, such as punctuation, complex future verb tenses, and stripping. LLMs show quite a competitive performance in English-Russian, although top-performing systems might struggle with some cases of named entities and terminology, function words, mediopassive voice, and semantic roles. Additionally, some LLMs generate very verbose or empty outputs, posing challenges to the evaluation process.

This year’s MT metrics challenge set submission by DFKI expands on previous years’ linguistically motivated challenge sets. It includes 137,000 items extracted from 100 MT systems for the two language directions (English to German, English to Russian), covering more than 100 linguistically motivated phenomena organized into 14 linguistic categories. The metrics with the statistically significant best performance in our linguistically motivated analysis are MetricX-24-Hybrid and MetricX-24 for English to German, and MetricX-24 for English to Russian. Metametrics and XCOMET are in the next ranking positions in both language pairs. Metrics are more accurate in detecting linguistic errors in translations by large language models (LLMs) than in translations based on the encoder-decoder neural machine translation (NMT) architecture. Some of the most difficult phenomena for the metrics to score are the transitive past progressive, multiple connectors, and the ditransitive simple future I for English to German, and pseudogapping, contact clauses, and cleft sentences for English to Russian. Despite its overall low performance, the LLM-based metric Gemba performs best in scoring German negation errors.

This paper offers a fine-grained analysis of the machine translation outputs in the context of the Shared Task at the 8th Conference of Machine Translation (WMT23). Building on the foundation of previous test suite efforts, our analysis includes Large Language Models and an updated test set featuring new linguistic phenomena. To our knowledge, this is the first fine-grained linguistic analysis for the GPT-4 translation outputs. Our evaluation spans German-English, English-German, and English-Russian language directions. Some of the phenomena with the lowest accuracies for German-English are idioms and resultative predicates. For English-German, these include mediopassive voice, and noun formation(er). As for English-Russian, these included idioms and semantic roles. GPT-4 performs equally or comparably to the best systems in German-English and English-German but falls in the second significance cluster for English-Russian.

We employ a linguistically motivated challenge set in order to evaluate the state-of-the-art machine translation metrics submitted to the Metrics Shared Task of the 8th Conference for Machine Translation. The challenge set includes about 21,000 items extracted from 155 machine translation systems for three language directions, covering more than 100 linguistically-motivated phenomena organized in 14 categories. The metrics that have the best performance with regard to our linguistically motivated analysis are the Cometoid22-wmt23 (a trained metric based on distillation) for German-English and MetricX-23-c (based on a fine-tuned mT5 encoder-decoder language model) for English-German and English-Russian. Some of the most difficult phenomena are passive voice for German-English, named entities, terminology and measurement units for English-German, and focus particles, adverbial clause and stripping for English-Russian.

The quality of machine-generated text is a complex construct consisting of various aspects and dimensions. We present a study that aims to uncover relevant perceptual quality dimensions for one type of machine-generated text, that is, Machine Translation. We conducted a crowdsourcing survey in the style of a Semantic Differential to collect attribute ratings for German MT outputs. An Exploratory Factor Analysis revealed the underlying perceptual dimensions. As a result, we extracted four factors that operate as relevant dimensions for the Quality of Experience of MT outputs: precision, complexity, grammaticality, and transparency.

This paper presents a fine-grained test suite for the language pair German–English. The test suite is based on a number of linguistically motivated categories and phenomena and the semi-automatic evaluation is carried out with regular expressions. We describe the creation and implementation of the test suite in detail, providing a full list of all categories and phenomena. Furthermore, we present various exemplary applications of our test suite that have been implemented in the past years, like contributions to the Conference of Machine Translation, the usage of the test suite and MT outputs for quality estimation, and the expansion of the test suite to the language pair Portuguese–English. We describe how we tracked the development of the performance of various systems MT systems over the years with the help of the test suite and which categories and phenomena are prone to resulting in MT errors. For the first time, we also make a large part of our test suite publicly available to the research community.

This document describes a fine-grained linguistically motivated analysis of 29 machine translation systems submitted at the Shared Task of the 7th Conference of Machine Translation (WMT22). This submission expands the test suite work of previous years by adding the language direction of English–Russian. As a result, evaluation takes place for the language directions of German–English, English–German, and English–Russian. We find that the German–English systems suffer in translating idioms, some tenses of modal verbs, and resultative predicates, the English–German ones in idioms, transitive-past progressive, and middle voice, whereas the English–Russian ones in pseudogapping and idioms.

We employ a linguistically motivated challenge set in order to evaluate the state-of-the-art machine translation metrics submitted to the Metrics Shared Task of the 7th Conference for Machine Translation. The challenge set includes about 20,000 items extracted from 145 MT systems for two language directions (German-English, English-German), covering more than 100 linguistically-motivated phenomena organized in 14 categories. The best performing metrics are YiSi-1, BERTScore and COMET-22 for German-English, and UniTE, UniTE-ref, XL-DA and xxl-DA19 for English-German.Metrics in both directions are performing worst when it comes to named-entities & terminology and particularly measuring units. Particularly in German-English they are weak at detecting issues at punctuation, polar questions, relative clauses, dates and idioms. In English-German, they perform worst at present progressive of transitive verbs, future II progressive of intransitive verbs, simple present perfect of ditransitive verbs and focus particles.

In this paper we present our observations and evaluations by observing the linguistic performance of the system on several steps on the training process of various English-to-German Neural Machine Translation models. The linguistic performance is measured through a semi-automatic process using a test suite. Among several linguistic observations, we find that the translation quality of some linguistic categories decreased within the recorded iterations. Additionally, we notice some drops of the translation quality of certain categories when using a larger corpus.

We are using a semi-automated test suite in order to provide a fine-grained linguistic evaluation for state-of-the-art machine translation systems. The evaluation includes 18 German to English and 18 English to German systems, submitted to the Translation Shared Task of the 2021 Conference on Machine Translation. Our submission adds up to the submissions of the previous years by creating and applying a wide-range test suite for English to German as a new language pair. The fine-grained evaluation allows spotting significant differences between systems that cannot be distinguished by the direct assessment of the human evaluation campaign. We find that most of the systems achieve good accuracies in the majority of linguistic phenomena but there are few phenomena with lower accuracy, such as the idioms, the modal pluperfect and the German resultative predicates. Two systems have significantly better test suite accuracy in macro-average in every language direction, Online-W and Facebook-AI for German to English and VolcTrans and Online-W for English to German. The systems show a steady improvement as compared to previous years.

This paper describes a test suite submission providing detailed statistics of linguistic performance for the state-of-the-art German-English systems of the Fifth Conference of Machine Translation (WMT20). The analysis covers 107 phenomena organized in 14 categories based on about 5,500 test items, including a manual annotation effort of 45 person hours. Two systems (Tohoku and Huoshan) appear to have significantly better test suite accuracy than the others, although the best system of WMT20 is not significantly better than the one from WMT19 in a macro-average. Additionally, we identify some linguistic phenomena where all systems suffer (such as idioms, resultative predicates and pluperfect), but we are also able to identify particular weaknesses for individual systems (such as quotation marks, lexical ambiguity and sluicing). Most of the systems of WMT19 which submitted new versions this year show improvements.

Evaluating translation models is a trade-off between effort and detail. On the one end of the spectrum there are automatic count-based methods such as BLEU, on the other end linguistic evaluations by humans, which arguably are more informative but also require a disproportionately high effort. To narrow the spectrum, we propose a general approach on how to automatically expose systematic differences between human and machine translations to human experts. Inspired by adversarial settings, we train a neural text classifier to distinguish human from machine translations. A classifier that performs and generalizes well after training should recognize systematic differences between the two classes, which we uncover with neural explainability methods. Our proof-of-concept implementation, DiaMaT, is open source. Applied to a dataset translated by a state-of-the-art neural Transformer model, DiaMaT achieves a classification accuracy of 75% and exposes meaningful differences between humans and the Transformer, amidst the current discussion about human parity.

We present the results of the application of a grammatical test suite for German-to-English MT on the systems submitted at WMT19, with a detailed analysis for 107 phenomena organized in 14 categories. The systems still translate wrong one out of four test items in average. Low performance is indicated for idioms, modals, pseudo-clefts, multi-word expressions and verb valency. When compared to last year, there has been a improvement of function words, non verbal agreement and punctuation. More detailed conclusions about particular systems and phenomena are also presented.

We present an analysis of 16 state-of-the-art MT systems on German-English based on a linguistically-motivated test suite. The test suite has been devised manually by a team of language professionals in order to cover a broad variety of linguistic phenomena that MT often fails to translate properly. It contains 5,000 test sentences covering 106 linguistic phenomena in 14 categories, with an increased focus on verb tenses, aspects and moods. The MT outputs are evaluated in a semi-automatic way through regular expressions that focus only on the part of the sentence that is relevant to each phenomenon. Through our analysis, we are able to compare systems based on their performance on these categories. Additionally, we reveal strengths and weaknesses of particular systems and we identify grammatical phenomena where the overall performance of MT is relatively low.

The Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL) features a shared task, in which participants train and test their learning systems on the same data sets. In 2017, the task was devoted to learning dependency parsers for a large number of languages, in a real-world setting without any gold-standard annotation on input. All test sets followed a unified annotation scheme, namely that of Universal Dependencies. In this paper, we define the task and evaluation methodology, describe how the data sets were prepared, report and analyze the main results, and provide a brief categorization of the different approaches of the participating systems.