Despite the increasingly good quality of Machine Translation (MT) systems, MT outputs require corrections. Automatic Post-Editing (APE) models have been introduced to perform these corrections without human intervention. However, no system has been able to fully automate the Post-Editing (PE) process. Moreover, while numerous translation tools, such as Translation Memories (TMs), largely benefit from translators’ input, Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) remains limited when it comes to PE. This research-in-progress paper discusses APE models and suggests that they could be improved in more interactive scenarios, as previously done in MT with the creation of Interactive MT (IMT) systems. Based on the hypothesis that PE would benefit from HCI, two methodologies are proposed. Both suggest that traditional batch learning settings are not optimal for PE. Instead, online techniques are recommended to train and update PE models on the fly, via either real or simulated interactions with the translator.

Recent advances in artificial neural networks now have a great impact on translation technology. A considerable achievement was reached in this field with the publication of L’Apprentissage Profond. This book, originally written in English (Deep Learning), was entirely machine-translated into French and post-edited by several experts. In this context, it appears essential to have a clear vision of the performance of MT tools. Providing an evaluation of NMT is precisely the aim of the present research paper. To accomplish this objective, a framework for error categorisation was built and a comparative analysis of the raw translation output and the post-edited version was performed with the purpose of identifying recurring patterns of errors. The findings showed that even though some grammatical errors were spotted, the output was generally correct from a linguistic point of view. The most recurring errors are linked to the specialised terminology employed in this book. Further errors include parts of text that were not translated as well as edits based on stylistic preferences. The major part of the output was not acceptable as such and required several edits per segment, but some sentences were of publishable quality and were therefore left untouched in the final version.