Quantifying the Influence of MT Output in the Translators’ Performance: A Case Study in Technical Translation

This paper presents experiments on the use of machine translation output for technical translation. MT output was used to produced translation memories that were used with a commercial CAT tool. Our experiments investigate the impact of the use of different translation memories containing MT output in translations’ quality and speed compared to the same task without the use of translation memory. We evaluated the performance of 15 novice translators translating technical English texts into German. Results suggest that translators are on average over 28% faster when using TM.

[1]  Hermann Ney,et al.  Accelerated DP based search for statistical translation , 1997, EUROSPEECH.

[2]  François Masselot,et al.  A Productivity Test of Statistical Machine Translation Post-Editing in a Typical Localisation Context , 2010, Prague Bull. Math. Linguistics.

[3]  Jörg Tiedemann,et al.  Parallel Data, Tools and Interfaces in OPUS , 2012, LREC.

[4]  Ralph Weischedel,et al.  A STUDY OF TRANSLATION ERROR RATE WITH TARGETED HUMAN ANNOTATION , 2005 .

[5]  Lucia Specia,et al.  Exploiting Objective Annotations for Minimising Translation Post-editing Effort , 2011, EAMT.

[6]  Nitin Madnani,et al.  Fluency, Adequacy, or HTER? Exploring Different Human Judgments with a Tunable MT Metric , 2009, WMT@EACL.

[7]  George R. Doddington,et al.  Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation Quality Using N-gram Co-Occurrence Statistics , 2002 .

[8]  Jean Carletta,et al.  Assessing Agreement on Classification Tasks: The Kappa Statistic , 1996, CL.

[9]  Jeffrey Heer,et al.  The efficacy of human post-editing for language translation , 2013, CHI.

[10]  Harold L. Somers,et al.  Translation Memory vs. Example-based MT – What’s the difference? , 2004 .

[11]  Martin Volk,et al.  Assessing post-editing efficiency in a realistic translation environment , 2013, MTSUMMIT.

[12]  Marcello Federico.  Measuring User Productivity in Machine Translation Enhanced Computer Assisted Translation , 2012, AMTA.

[13]  Lynne Bowker,et al.  Productivity vs Quality? A pilot study on the impact of translation memory systems , 2005 .

[14]  Salim Roukos,et al.  Bleu: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation , 2002, ACL.

[15]  Vladimir I. Levenshtein,et al.  Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals , 1965 .

[16]  Matthew G. Snover,et al.  A Study of Translation Edit Rate with Targeted Human Annotation , 2006, AMTA.

[17]  Ana Guerberof Arenas.  Productivity and Quality in the Post-editing of Outputs from Translation Memories and Machine Translation , 2008 .

[18]  O'Brien Sharon,et al.  EYE‐TRACKING AND TRANSLATION MEMORY MATCHES , 2007 .

[19]  Holger Schwenk,et al.  Issues in incremental adaptation of statistical MT from human post-edits , 2013, MTSUMMIT.

[20]  Elina Lagoudaki.  The Value of Machine Translation for the Professional Translator , 2008, AMTA.

[21]  Alon Lavie,et al.  Meteor 1.3: Automatic Metric for Reliable Optimization and Evaluation of Machine Translation Systems , 2011, WMT@EMNLP.

[22]  Lucia Morado Vazquez,et al.  Comparing forum data post-editing performance using translation memory and machine translation output: a pilot study , 2013 .