Findings of the WMT 2024 Shared Task on Chat Translation

This paper presents the findings from the third edition of the Chat Translation Shared Task. As with previous editions, the task involved translating bilingual customer support conversations, specifically focusing on the impact of conversation context in translation quality and evaluation. We also include two new language pairs: English-Korean and English-Dutch, in addition to the set of language pairs from previous editions: English-German, English-French, and English-Brazilian Portuguese. We received 22 primary submissions and 32 contrastive submissions from eight teams, with each language pair having participation from at least three teams. We evaluated the systems comprehensively using both automatic metrics and human judgments via a direct assessment framework. The official rankings for each language pair were determined based on human evaluation scores, considering performance in both translation directions--agent and customer. Our analysis shows that while the systems excelled at translating individual turns, there is room for improvement in overall conversation-level translation quality.

Watching the Watchers: Exposing Gender Disparities in Machine Translation Quality Estimation

The automatic assessment of translation quality has recently become crucial for many stages of the translation pipeline, from data curation to training and decoding. However, while quality estimation metrics have been optimized to align with human judgments, no attention has been given to these metrics' potential biases, particularly in reinforcing visibility and usability for some demographic groups over others. This paper is the first to investigate gender bias in quality estimation (QE) metrics and its downstream impact on machine translation (MT). We focus on out-of-English translations where the target language uses grammatical gender. We ask: (RQ1) Do contemporary QE metrics exhibit gender bias? (RQ2) Can the use of contextual information mitigate this bias? (RQ3) How does QE influence gender bias in MT outputs? Experiments with state-of-the-art QE metrics across multiple domains, datasets, and languages reveal significant bias. Masculine-inflected translations score higher than feminine-inflected ones, and gender-neutral translations are penalized. Moreover, context-aware QE metrics reduce errors for masculine-inflected references but fail to address feminine referents, exacerbating gender disparities. Additionally, we show that QE metrics can perpetuate gender bias in MT systems when used in quality-aware decoding. Our findings highlight the need to address gender bias in QE metrics to ensure equitable and unbiased MT systems.

Modeling User Preferences with Automatic Metrics: Creating a High-Quality Preference Dataset for Machine Translation

Alignment with human preferences is an important step in developing accurate and safe large language models. This is no exception in machine translation (MT), where better handling of language nuances and context-specific variations leads to improved quality. However, preference data based on human feedback can be very expensive to obtain and curate at a large scale. Automatic metrics, on the other hand, can induce preferences, but they might not match human expectations perfectly. In this paper, we propose an approach that leverages the best of both worlds. We first collect sentence-level quality assessments from professional linguists on translations generated by multiple high-quality MT systems and evaluate the ability of current automatic metrics to recover these preferences. We then use this analysis to curate a new dataset, MT-Pref (metric induced translation preference) dataset, which comprises 18k instances covering 18 language directions, using texts sourced from multiple domains post-2022. We show that aligning TOWER models on MT-Pref significantly improves translation quality on WMT23 and FLORES benchmarks.

xTower: A Multilingual LLM for Explaining and Correcting Translation Errors

While machine translation (MT) systems are achieving increasingly strong performance on benchmarks, they often produce translations with errors and anomalies. Understanding these errors can potentially help improve the translation quality and user experience. This paper introduces xTower, an open large language model (LLM) built on top of TowerBase designed to provide free-text explanations for translation errors in order to guide the generation of a corrected translation. The quality of the generated explanations by xTower are assessed via both intrinsic and extrinsic evaluation. We ask expert translators to evaluate the quality of the explanations across two dimensions: relatedness towards the error span being explained and helpfulness in error understanding and improving translation quality. Extrinsically, we test xTower across various experimental setups in generating translation corrections, demonstrating significant improvements in translation quality. Our findings highlight xTower's potential towards not only producing plausible and helpful explanations of automatic translations, but also leveraging them to suggest corrected translations.

The Prompt Report: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Techniques

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) systems are being increasingly deployed across all parts of industry and research settings. Developers and end users interact with these systems through the use of prompting or prompt engineering. While prompting is a widespread and highly researched concept, there exists conflicting terminology and a poor ontological understanding of what constitutes a prompt due to the area's nascency. This paper establishes a structured understanding of prompts, by assembling a taxonomy of prompting techniques and analyzing their use. We present a comprehensive vocabulary of 33 vocabulary terms, a taxonomy of 58 text-only prompting techniques, and 40 techniques for other modalities. We further present a meta-analysis of the entire literature on natural language prefix-prompting.

QUEST: Quality-Aware Metropolis-Hastings Sampling for Machine Translation

An important challenge in machine translation (MT) is to generate high-quality and diverse translations. Prior work has shown that the estimated likelihood from the MT model correlates poorly with translation quality. In contrast, quality evaluation metrics (such as COMET or BLEURT) exhibit high correlations with human judgments, which has motivated their use as rerankers (such as quality-aware and minimum Bayes risk decoding). However, relying on a single translation with high estimated quality increases the chances of "gaming the metric''. In this paper, we address the problem of sampling a set of high-quality and diverse translations. We provide a simple and effective way to avoid over-reliance on noisy quality estimates by using them as the energy function of a Gibbs distribution. Instead of looking for a mode in the distribution, we generate multiple samples from high-density areas through the Metropolis-Hastings algorithm, a simple Markov chain Monte Carlo approach. The results show that our proposed method leads to high-quality and diverse outputs across multiple language pairs (English$\leftrightarrow${German, Russian}) with two strong decoder-only LLMs (Alma-7b, Tower-7b).

Can Automatic Metrics Assess High-Quality Translations?

Automatic metrics for evaluating translation quality are typically validated by measuring how well they correlate with human assessments. However, correlation methods tend to capture only the ability of metrics to differentiate between good and bad source-translation pairs, overlooking their reliability in distinguishing alternative translations for the same source. In this paper, we confirm that this is indeed the case by showing that current metrics are insensitive to nuanced differences in translation quality. This effect is most pronounced when the quality is high and the variance among alternatives is low. Given this finding, we shift towards detecting high-quality correct translations, an important problem in practical decision-making scenarios where a binary check of correctness is prioritized over a nuanced evaluation of quality. Using the MQM framework as the gold standard, we systematically stress-test the ability of current metrics to identify translations with no errors as marked by humans. Our findings reveal that current metrics often over or underestimate translation quality, indicating significant room for improvement in automatic evaluation methods.

Is Context Helpful for Chat Translation Evaluation?

Despite the recent success of automatic metrics for assessing translation quality, their application in evaluating the quality of machine-translated chats has been limited. Unlike more structured texts like news, chat conversations are often unstructured, short, and heavily reliant on contextual information. This poses questions about the reliability of existing sentence-level metrics in this domain as well as the role of context in assessing the translation quality. Motivated by this, we conduct a meta-evaluation of existing sentence-level automatic metrics, primarily designed for structured domains such as news, to assess the quality of machine-translated chats. We find that reference-free metrics lag behind reference-based ones, especially when evaluating translation quality in out-of-English settings. We then investigate how incorporating conversational contextual information in these metrics affects their performance. Our findings show that augmenting neural learned metrics with contextual information helps improve correlation with human judgments in the reference-free scenario and when evaluating translations in out-of-English settings. Finally, we propose a new evaluation metric, Context-MQM, that utilizes bilingual context with a large language model (LLM) and further validate that adding context helps even for LLM-based evaluation metrics.

Tower: An Open Multilingual Large Language Model for Translation-Related Tasks

While general-purpose large language models (LLMs) demonstrate proficiency on multiple tasks within the domain of translation, approaches based on open LLMs are competitive only when specializing on a single task. In this paper, we propose a recipe for tailoring LLMs to multiple tasks present in translation workflows. We perform continued pretraining on a multilingual mixture of monolingual and parallel data, creating TowerBase, followed by finetuning on instructions relevant for translation processes, creating TowerInstruct. Our final model surpasses open alternatives on several tasks relevant to translation workflows and is competitive with general-purpose closed LLMs. To facilitate future research, we release the Tower models, our specialization dataset, an evaluation framework for LLMs focusing on the translation ecosystem, and a collection of model generations, including ours, on our benchmark.

Do Text Simplification Systems Preserve Meaning? A Human Evaluation via Reading Comprehension

Automatic text simplification (TS) aims to automate the process of rewriting text to make it easier for people to read. A pre-requisite for TS to be useful is that it should convey information that is consistent with the meaning of the original text. However, current TS evaluation protocols assess system outputs for simplicity and meaning preservation without regard for the document context in which output sentences occur and for how people understand them. In this work, we introduce a human evaluation framework to assess whether simplified texts preserve meaning using reading comprehension questions. With this framework, we conduct a thorough human evaluation of texts by humans and by nine automatic systems. Supervised systems that leverage pre-training knowledge achieve the highest scores on the reading comprehension (RC) tasks amongst the automatic controllable TS systems. However, even the best-performing supervised system struggles with at least 14% of the questions, marking them as "unanswerable'' based on simplified content. We further investigate how existing TS evaluation metrics and automatic question-answering systems approximate the human judgments we obtained.