The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2306.00539 · v1 · pith:MTF625SF · submitted 2023-06-01 · cs.LG · cs.CL

A Call for Standardization and Validation of Text Style Transfer Evaluation

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:MTF625SFrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.LG cs.CL
keywords evaluationstandardizationvalidationautomatedhumanmeta-analysisstyletext
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Text Style Transfer (TST) evaluation is, in practice, inconsistent. Therefore, we conduct a meta-analysis on human and automated TST evaluation and experimentation that thoroughly examines existing literature in the field. The meta-analysis reveals a substantial standardization gap in human and automated evaluation. In addition, we also find a validation gap: only few automated metrics have been validated using human experiments. To this end, we thoroughly scrutinize both the standardization and validation gap and reveal the resulting pitfalls. This work also paves the way to close the standardization and validation gap in TST evaluation by calling out requirements to be met by future research.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Casual as an Anchor: Resolving Supervision Misalignment in Formality Transfer Dataset

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    The authors introduce a three-level formality spectrum (informal, casual, formal) and the 3LF dataset to correct supervision misalignment in formality transfer, reporting large gains in informal-to-formal performance ...