Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Translation Error Detection as Rationale Extraction

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 2108.12197 v1 pith:K4CVOOFY submitted 2021-08-27 cs.CL

Translation Error Detection as Rationale Extraction

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

Recent Quality Estimation (QE) models based on multilingual pre-trained representations have achieved very competitive results when predicting the overall quality of translated sentences. Predicting translation errors, i.e. detecting specifically which words are incorrect, is a more challenging task, especially with limited amounts of training data. We hypothesize that, not unlike humans, successful QE models rely on translation errors to predict overall sentence quality. By exploring a set of feature attribution methods that assign relevance scores to the inputs to explain model predictions, we study the behaviour of state-of-the-art sentence-level QE models and show that explanations (i.e. rationales) extracted from these models can indeed be used to detect translation errors. We therefore (i) introduce a novel semi-supervised method for word-level QE and (ii) propose to use the QE task as a new benchmark for evaluating the plausibility of feature attribution, i.e. how interpretable model explanations are to humans.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.