OTTAWA: Optimal TransporT Adaptive Word Aligner for Hallucination and Omission Translation Errors Detection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, there has been considerable attention on detecting hallucinations and omissions in Machine Translation (MT) systems. The two dominant approaches to tackle this task involve analyzing the MT system's internal states or relying on the output of external tools, such as sentence similarity or MT quality estimators. In this work, we introduce OTTAWA, a novel Optimal Transport (OT)-based word aligner specifically designed to enhance the detection of hallucinations and omissions in MT systems. Our approach explicitly models the missing alignments by introducing a "null" vector, for which we propose a novel one-side constrained OT setting to allow an adaptive null alignment. Our approach yields competitive results compared to state-of-the-art methods across 18 language pairs on the HalOmi benchmark. In addition, it shows promising features, such as the ability to distinguish between both error types and perform word-level detection without accessing the MT system's internal states.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it