Papers › It is Not as Good as You Think! Evaluating Simultaneous Machine Translation on...

It is Not as Good as You Think! Evaluating Simultaneous Machine Translation on Interpretation Data

11 Oct 2021EMNLP 2021 11arXiv:2110.05213archive 2025-07-28

Jinming Zhao, Philip Arthur, Gholamreza Haffari, Trevor Cohn, Ehsan Shareghi

Most existing simultaneous machine translation (SiMT) systems are trained and evaluated on offline translation corpora. We argue that SiMT systems should be trained and tested on real interpretation data. To illustrate this argument, we propose an interpretation test set and conduct a realistic evaluation of SiMT trained on offline translations. Our results, on our test set along with 3 existing smaller scale language pairs, highlight the difference of up-to 13.83 BLEU score when SiMT models are evaluated on translation vs interpretation data. In the absence of interpretation training data, we propose a translation-to-interpretation (T2I) style transfer method which allows converting existing offline translations into interpretation-style data, leading to up-to 2.8 BLEU improvement. However, the evaluation gap remains notable, calling for constructing large-scale interpretation corpora better suited for evaluating and developing SiMT systems.

PaperPDFConference PDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

mingzi151/interpretationdata officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Machine TranslationStyle TransferTranslation

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Methods

Test

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections