Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Visual Cues and Error Correction for Translation Robustness

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 2103.07352 v3 pith:SQ7MBV77 submitted 2021-03-12 cs.CL

Visual Cues and Error Correction for Translation Robustness

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

Neural Machine Translation models are sensitive to noise in the input texts, such as misspelled words and ungrammatical constructions. Existing robustness techniques generally fail when faced with unseen types of noise and their performance degrades on clean texts. In this paper, we focus on three types of realistic noise that are commonly generated by humans and introduce the idea of visual context to improve translation robustness for noisy texts. In addition, we describe a novel error correction training regime that can be used as an auxiliary task to further improve translation robustness. Experiments on English-French and English-German translation show that both multimodal and error correction components improve model robustness to noisy texts, while still retaining translation quality on clean texts.

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. Bridging the Usability Gap: Lessons from Interpreting Studies for Machine Interpreting Design

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Machine interpreting should shift from fidelity metrics to three design priorities—agency, grounding, and experience—drawn from interpreting studies to close the usability gap with human-mediated communication.