TRANSLATIONCORRECT: A Unified Framework for Machine Translation Post-Editing with Predictive Error Assistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Machine translation (MT) post-editing and research data collection often rely on inefficient, disconnected workflows. We introduce TranslationCorrect, an integrated framework designed to streamline these tasks. TranslationCorrect combines MT generation using models like NLLB, automated error prediction using models like XCOMET or LLM APIs (providing detailed reasoning), and an intuitive post-editing interface within a single environment. Built with human-computer interaction (HCI) principles in mind to minimize cognitive load, as confirmed by a user study. For translators, it enables them to correct errors and batch translate efficiently. For researchers, TranslationCorrect exports high-quality span-based annotations in the Error Span Annotation (ESA) format, using an error taxonomy inspired by Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM). These outputs are compatible with state-of-the-art error detection models and suitable for training MT or post-editing systems. Our user study confirms that TranslationCorrect significantly improves translation efficiency and user satisfaction over traditional annotation methods.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.015 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".