This paper discusses a classification-based approach to machine translation evaluation, as opposed to a common regression-based approach in the WMT Metrics task. Recent machine translation usually works well but sometimes makes critical errors due to just a few wrong word choices. Our classification-based approach focuses on such errors using several error type labels, for practical machine translation evaluation in an age of neural machine translation. We made additional annotations on the WMT 2015-2017 Metrics datasets with fluency and adequacy labels to distinguish different types of translation errors from syntactic and semantic viewpoints. We present our human evaluation criteria for the corpus development and automatic evaluation experiments using the corpus. The human evaluation corpus will be publicly available upon publication.

This paper describes our submission to the WMT2021 shared metrics task. Our metric is operative to segment-level and system-level translations. Our belief toward a better metric is to detect a significant error that cannot be missed in the real practice cases of evaluation. For that reason, we used pseudo-negative examples in which attributes of some words are transferred to the reversed attribute words, and we build evaluation models to handle such serious mistakes of translations. We fine-tune a multilingual largely pre-trained model on the provided corpus of past years’ metric task and fine-tune again further on the synthetic negative examples that are derived from the same fine-tune corpus. From the evaluation results of the WMT21’s development corpus, fine-tuning on the pseudo-negatives using WMT15-17 and WMT18-20 metric corpus achieved a better Pearson’s correlation score than the one fine-tuned without negative examples. Our submitted models,hyp+src_hyp+ref and hyp+src_hyp+ref.negative, are the plain model using WMT18-20 and the one additionally fine-tuned on negative samples, respectively.

We propose an automatic evaluation method of machine translation that uses source language sentences regarded as additional pseudo references. The proposed method evaluates a translation hypothesis in a regression model. The model takes the paired source, reference, and hypothesis sentence all together as an input. A pretrained large scale cross-lingual language model encodes the input to sentence-pair vectors, and the model predicts a human evaluation score with those vectors. Our experiments show that our proposed method using Cross-lingual Language Model (XLM) trained with a translation language modeling (TLM) objective achieves a higher correlation with human judgments than a baseline method that uses only hypothesis and reference sentences. Additionally, using source sentences in our proposed method is confirmed to improve the evaluation performance.