Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Error Span Annotation: A Balanced Approach for Human Evaluation of Machine Translation

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2406.11580 v2 pith:SSNVP5XD submitted 2024-06-17 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords errorhumanevaluationspantranslationannotationdoneexpensive
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

High-quality Machine Translation (MT) evaluation relies heavily on human judgments. Comprehensive error classification methods, such as Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM), are expensive as they are time-consuming and can only be done by experts, whose availability may be limited especially for low-resource languages. On the other hand, just assigning overall scores, like Direct Assessment (DA), is simpler and faster and can be done by translators of any level, but is less reliable. In this paper, we introduce Error Span Annotation (ESA), a human evaluation protocol which combines the continuous rating of DA with the high-level error severity span marking of MQM. We validate ESA by comparing it to MQM and DA for 12 MT systems and one human reference translation (English to German) from WMT23. The results show that ESA offers faster and cheaper annotations than MQM at the same quality level, without the requirement of expensive MQM experts.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Who Watches the Watchmen? Humans Disagree With Translation Metrics on Unseen Domains

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Automatic translation metrics show lower agreement with humans on unseen technical domains than humans show with each other, and their robustness claims weaken when benchmarked against inter-annotator agreement instea...

  2. Preliminary Ranking of WMT25 General Machine Translation Systems

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    Automatic metrics rank WMT25 MT systems, with human evaluation pending and expected to supersede these results.

Pith tools