Abstract

We introduce a novel evaluation scheme for the human evaluation of different machine translation systems. Our method is based on direct comparison of two sentences at a time by human judges. These binary judgments are then used to decide between all possible rankings of the systems. The advantages of this new method are the lower dependency on extensive evaluation guidelines, and a tighter focus on a typical evaluation task, namely the ranking of systems. Furthermore we argue that machine translation evaluations should be regarded as statistical processes, both for human and automatic evaluation. We show how confidence ranges for state-of-the-art evaluation measures such as WER and TER can be computed accurately and efficiently without having to resort to Monte Carlo estimates. We give an example of our new evaluation scheme, as well as a comparison with classical automatic and human evaluation on data from a recent international evaluation campaign. 1

Citations