MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7126460285 · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.wmt-1.8

Test Set Sampling Affects System Rankings: Expanded Human Evaluation of WMT20 English-Inuktitut Systems

2022· article· en· W7126460285 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rebecca Knowles, Chi-kiu Lo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPsychometric Methodologies and Testing
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Sampling (signal processing)Test (biology)Data setTest set

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a collection of expanded human annotations of the WMT20 English-Inuktitut machine translation shared task, covering the Nunavut Hansard portion of the dataset.Additionally, we recompute News rankings to take into account the completed set of human annotations and certain irregularities in the annotation task construction.We show the effect of these changes on the downstream task of the evaluation of automatic metrics.Finally, we demonstrate that character-level metrics correlate well with human judgments for the task of automatically evaluating translation into this polysynthetic language.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.056
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.107
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0560.107
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.677
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychometric Methodologies and TestingFrench-language works237,207