Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Do GPTs Produce Less Literal Translations?

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 2305.16806 v4 pith:MJLDD4W7 submitted 2023-05-26 cs.CL cs.AI

Do GPTs Produce Less Literal Translations?

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords translationslanguagemodelsbetterdifferencesgptslessliteral
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) such as GPT-3 have emerged as general-purpose language models capable of addressing many natural language generation or understanding tasks. On the task of Machine Translation (MT), multiple works have investigated few-shot prompting mechanisms to elicit better translations from LLMs. However, there has been relatively little investigation on how such translations differ qualitatively from the translations generated by standard Neural Machine Translation (NMT) models. In this work, we investigate these differences in terms of the literalness of translations produced by the two systems. Using literalness measures involving word alignment and monotonicity, we find that translations out of English (E-X) from GPTs tend to be less literal, while exhibiting similar or better scores on MT quality metrics. We demonstrate that this finding is borne out in human evaluations as well. We then show that these differences are especially pronounced when translating sentences that contain idiomatic expressions.

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. ML2B: Benchmarking LLMs on Cross-Lingual ML Pipeline Generation

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0

    A new open-source benchmark evaluates LLM-generated end-to-end ML pipelines from Kaggle competition descriptions translated into 13 languages, with 6 private tasks to limit data leakage.