Several uncertainty estimation methods have been recently proposed for machine translation evaluation. While these methods can provide a useful indication of when not to trust model predictions, we show in this paper that the majority of them tend to underestimate model uncertainty, and as a result, they often produce misleading confidence intervals that do not cover the ground truth. We propose as an alternative the use of conformal prediction , a distribution-free method to obtain confidence intervals with a theoretically established guarantee on coverage. First, we demonstrate that split conformal prediction can “correct” the confidence intervals of previous methods to yield a desired coverage level, and we demonstrate these findings across multiple machine translation evaluation metrics and uncertainty quantification methods. Further, we highlight biases in estimated confidence intervals, reflected in imbalanced coverage for different attributes, such as the language and the quality of translations. We address this by applying conditional conformal prediction techniques to obtain calibration subsets for each data subgroup, leading to equalized coverage. Overall, we show that, provided access to a calibration set, conformal prediction can help identify the most suitable uncertainty quantification methods and adapt the predicted confidence intervals to ensure fairness with respect to different attributes. 1

The rapid proliferation of large language models and natural language processing (NLP) applications creates a crucial need for uncertainty quantification to mitigate risks such as Hallucinations and to enhance decision-making reliability in critical applications. Conformal prediction is emerging as a theoretically sound and practically useful framework, combining flexibility with strong statistical guarantees. Its model-agnostic and distribution-free nature makes it particularly promising to address the current shortcomings of NLP systems that stem from the absence of uncertainty quantification. This paper provides a comprehensive survey of conformal prediction techniques, their guarantees, and existing applications in NLP, pointing to directions for future research and open challenges.

Despite the recent success of automatic metrics for assessing translation quality, their application in evaluating the quality of machine-translated chats has been limited. Unlike more structured texts like news, chat conversations are often unstructured, short, and heavily reliant on contextual information. This poses questions about the reliability of existing sentence-level metrics in this domain as well as the role of context in assessing the translation quality. Motivated by this, we conduct a meta-evaluation of existing automatic metrics, primarily designed for structured domains such as news, to assess the quality of machine-translated chats. We find that reference-free metrics lag behind reference-based ones, especially when evaluating translation quality in out-of-English settings. We then investigate how incorporating conversational contextual information in these metrics for sentence-level evaluation affects their performance. Our findings show that augmenting neural learned metrics with contextual information helps improve correlation with human judgments in the reference-free scenario and when evaluating translations in out-of-English settings. Finally, we propose a new evaluation metric, Context-MQM , that utilizes bilingual context with a large language model (LLM) and further validate that adding context helps even for LLM-based evaluation metrics.

Widely used learned metrics for machine translation evaluation, such as Comet and Bleurt , estimate the quality of a translation hypothesis by providing a single sentence-level score. As such, they offer little insight into translation errors (e.g., what are the errors and what is their severity). On the other hand, generative large language models (LLMs) are amplifying the adoption of more granular strategies to evaluation, attempting to detail and categorize translation errors. In this work, we introduce x comet , an open-source learned metric designed to bridge the gap between these approaches. x comet integrates both sentence-level evaluation and error span detection capabilities, exhibiting state-of-the-art performance across all types of evaluation (sentence-level, system-level, and error span detection). Moreover, it does so while highlighting and categorizing error spans, thus enriching the quality assessment. We also provide a robustness analysis with stress tests, and show that x comet is largely capable of identifying localized critical errors and hallucinations.

Natural language generation has witnessed significant advancements due to the training of large language models on vast internet-scale datasets. Despite these advancements, there exists a critical challenge: These models can inadvertently generate content that is toxic, inaccurate, and unhelpful, and existing automatic evaluation metrics often fall short of identifying these shortcomings. As models become more capable, human feedback is an invaluable signal for evaluating and improving models. This survey aims to provide an overview of recent research that has leveraged human feedback to improve natural language generation. First, we introduce a taxonomy distilled from existing research to categorize and organize the varied forms of feedback. Next, we discuss how feedback can be described by its format and objective, and cover the two approaches proposed to use feedback (either for training or decoding): directly using feedback or training feedback models . We also discuss existing datasets for human-feedback data collection, and concerns surrounding feedback collection. Finally, we provide an overview of the nascent field of AI feedback , which uses large language models to make judgments based on a set of principles and minimize the need for human intervention. We also release a website of this survey at feedback-gap-survey.info .

Hallucinated translations can severely undermine and raise safety issues when machine translation systems are deployed in the wild. Previous research on the topic focused on small bilingual models trained on high-resource languages, leaving a gap in our understanding of hallucinations in multilingual models across diverse translation scenarios. In this work, we fill this gap by conducting a comprehensive analysis—over 100 language pairs across various resource levels and going beyond English-centric directions—on both the M2M neural machine translation (NMT) models and GPT large language models (LLMs). Among several insights, we highlight that models struggle with hallucinations primarily in low-resource directions and when translating out of English, where, critically, they may reveal toxic patterns that can be traced back to the training data. We also find that LLMs produce qualitatively different hallucinations to those of NMT models. Finally, we show that hallucinations are hard to reverse by merely scaling models trained with the same data. However, employing more diverse models, trained on different data or with different procedures, as fallback systems can improve translation quality and virtually eliminate certain pathologies.

Recent work in natural language processing (NLP) has yielded appealing results from scaling model parameters and training data; however, using only scale to improve performance means that resource consumption also grows. Such resources include data, time, storage, or energy, all of which are naturally limited and unevenly distributed. This motivates research into efficient methods that require fewer resources to achieve similar results. This survey synthesizes and relates current methods and findings in efficient NLP. We aim to provide both guidance for conducting NLP under limited resources, and point towards promising research directions for developing more efficient methods.

Translation quality estimation is a task of growing importance in NLP, due to its potential to reduce post-editing human effort in disruptive ways. However, this potential is currently limited by the relatively low accuracy of existing systems. In this paper, we achieve remarkable improvements by exploiting synergies between the related tasks of word-level quality estimation and automatic post-editing. First, we stack a new, carefully engineered, neural model into a rich feature-based word-level quality estimation system. Then, we use the output of an automatic post-editing system as an extra feature, obtaining striking results on WMT16: a word-level F MULT 1 score of 57.47% (an absolute gain of +7.95% over the current state of the art), and a Pearson correlation score of 65.56% for sentence-level HTER prediction (an absolute gain of +13.36%).