Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Translation Deserves Better: Analyzing Translation Artifacts in Cross-lingual Visual Question Answering

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 2406.02331 v1 pith:4XXB65XZ submitted 2024-06-04 cs.CL

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

Building a reliable visual question answering~(VQA) system across different languages is a challenging problem, primarily due to the lack of abundant samples for training. To address this challenge, recent studies have employed machine translation systems for the cross-lingual VQA task. This involves translating the evaluation samples into a source language (usually English) and using monolingual models (i.e., translate-test). However, our analysis reveals that translated texts contain unique characteristics distinct from human-written ones, referred to as translation artifacts. We find that these artifacts can significantly affect the models, confirmed by extensive experiments across diverse models, languages, and translation processes. In light of this, we present a simple data augmentation strategy that can alleviate the adverse impacts of translation artifacts.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. VLM@school -- Evaluation of AI image understanding on German middle school knowledge

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new German middle school visual question-answering benchmark shows open-weight VLMs score below 45% overall, with especially weak results in music, math, and adversarial questions.

Pith tools