As strong machine translation (MT) systems are increasingly based on large language models (LLMs), reliable quality benchmarking requires methods that capture their ability to leverage extended context. This study compares two commercial MT systems – DeepL and Supertext – by assessing their performance on unsegmented texts. We evaluate translation quality across four language directions with professional translators assessing segments with full document-level context. While segment-level assessments indicate no strong preference between the systems in most cases, document-level analysis reveals a preference for Supertext in three out of four language directions, suggesting superior consistency across longer texts. We advocate for more context-sensitive evaluation methodologies to ensure that MT quality assessments reflect real-world usability. We release all evaluation data and scripts for further analysis and reproduction at https://github.com/supertext/evaluation_deepl_supertext.

The vast majority of today’s large language models (LLMs) are English-centric, having been pretrained predominantly on English text. Yet, in order to meet user expectations, models need to be able to respond appropriately in multiple languages once deployed in downstream applications. This requires strong cross-lingual transfer abilities.In this work, we investigate the minimal amount of multilinguality required during finetuning to elicit cross-lingual generalisation in English-centric LLMs. In experiments across four LLMs, we find that multilingual instruction tuning with as few as two to three languages is both necessary and sufficient to elicit effective cross-lingual generalisation, with the limiting factor being the degree to which a target language is seen during pretraining. Evaluations on five different tasks further reveal that multilingual instruction tuning is most beneficial for generative tasks that assume input/output language agreement, such as in chat settings, while being of less importance for highly structured classification-style tasks.

Natural language generation models reproduce and often amplify the biases present in their training data. Previous research explored using sequence-to-sequence rewriting models to transform biased model outputs (or original texts) into more gender-fair language by creating pseudo training data through linguistic rules. However, this approach is not practical for languages with more complex morphology than English. We hypothesise that creating training data in the reverse direction, i.e. starting from gender-fair text, is easier for morphologically complex languages and show that it matches the performance of state-of-the-art rewriting models for English. To eliminate the rule-based nature of data creation, we instead propose using machine translation models to create gender-biased text from real gender-fair text via round-trip translation. Our approach allows us to train a rewriting model for German without the need for elaborate handcrafted rules. The outputs of this model increased gender-fairness as shown in a human evaluation study.

For sensible progress in natural language processing, it is important that we are aware of the limitations of the evaluation metrics we use. In this work, we evaluate how robust metrics are to non-standardized dialects, i.e. spelling differences in language varieties that do not have a standard orthography. To investigate this, we collect a dataset of human translations and human judgments for automatic machine translations from English to two Swiss German dialects. We further create a challenge set for dialect variation and benchmark existing metrics’ performances. Our results show that existing metrics cannot reliably evaluate Swiss German text generation outputs, especially on segment level. We propose initial design adaptations that increase robustness in the face of non-standardized dialects, although there remains much room for further improvement. The dataset, code, and models are available here: https://github.com/textshuttle/dialect_eval