Is Preference Alignment Always the Best Option to Enhance LLM-Based Translation? An Empirical Analysis

Neural metrics for machine translation (MT) evaluation have become increasingly prominent due to their superior correlation with human judgments compared to traditional lexical metrics. Researchers have therefore utilized neural metrics through quality-informed decoding strategies, achieving better results than likelihood-based methods. With the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs), preference-based alignment techniques have gained attention for their potential to enhance translation quality by optimizing model weights directly on preferences induced by quality estimators. This study focuses on Contrastive Preference Optimization (CPO) and conducts extensive experiments to evaluate the impact of preference-based alignment on translation quality. Our findings indicate that while CPO consistently outperforms Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) on high-quality data with regard to the alignment metric, it may lead to instability across downstream evaluation metrics, particularly between neural and lexical ones. Additionally, we demonstrate that relying solely on the base model for generating candidate translations achieves performance comparable to using multiple external systems, while ensuring better consistency across downstream metrics.

Towards Trustworthy Reranking: A Simple yet Effective Abstention Mechanism

Neural Information Retrieval (NIR) has significantly improved upon heuristic-based IR systems. Yet, failures remain frequent, the models used often being unable to retrieve documents relevant to the user's query. We address this challenge by proposing a lightweight abstention mechanism tailored for real-world constraints, with particular emphasis placed on the reranking phase. We introduce a protocol for evaluating abstention strategies in a black-box scenario, demonstrating their efficacy, and propose a simple yet effective data-driven mechanism. We provide open-source code for experiment replication and abstention implementation, fostering wider adoption and application in diverse contexts.

Theoretical and experimental study of SMOTE: limitations and comparisons of rebalancing strategies

Synthetic Minority Oversampling Technique (SMOTE) is a common rebalancing strategy for handling imbalanced data sets. Asymptotically, we prove that SMOTE (with default parameter) regenerates the original distribution by simply copying the original minority samples. We also prove that SMOTE density vanishes near the boundary of the support of the minority distribution, therefore justifying the common BorderLine SMOTE strategy. Then we introduce two new SMOTE-related strategies, and compare them with state-of-the-art rebalancing procedures. We show that rebalancing strategies are only required when the data set is highly imbalanced. For such data sets, SMOTE, our proposals, or undersampling procedures are the best strategies.