Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Iterative Translation Refinement with Large Language Models

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 2306.03856 v2 pith:SYAZEHEN submitted 2023-06-06 cs.CL cs.AI

Iterative Translation Refinement with Large Language Models

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords translationhumanlanguagequalitylargerefinementablationanchoring
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

We propose iteratively prompting a large language model to self-correct a translation, with inspiration from their strong language understanding and translation capability as well as a human-like translation approach. Interestingly, multi-turn querying reduces the output's string-based metric scores, but neural metrics suggest comparable or improved quality. Human evaluations indicate better fluency and naturalness compared to initial translations and even human references, all while maintaining quality. Ablation studies underscore the importance of anchoring the refinement to the source and a reasonable seed translation for quality considerations. We also discuss the challenges in evaluation and relation to human performance and translationese.

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. Reasoning Before Translation: Enhancing Legal Machine Translation with Structured Reasoning

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    On Swiss legal translation, reinforcement learning with a ChrF reward improves small open models more than supervised fine-tuning, but frontier reasoning models still score higher.