Feeding Two Birds or Favoring One? Adequacy-Fluency Tradeoffs in Evaluation and Meta-Evaluation of Machine Translation

Behzad Shayegh, Jan-Thorsten Peter, David Vilar, Tobias Domhan, Juraj Juraska +2 more
9/24/2025
cs.CLcs.AIcs.LG

No confident code implementation found for this paper.

Abstract

We investigate the tradeoff between adequacy and fluency in machine translation. We show the severity of this tradeoff at the evaluation level and analyze where popular metrics fall within it. Essentially, current metrics generally lean toward adequacy, meaning that their scores correlate more strongly with the adequacy of translations than with fluency. More importantly, we find that this tradeoff also persists at the meta-evaluation level, and that the standard WMT meta-evaluation favors adequacy-oriented metrics over fluency-oriented ones. We show that this bias is partially attributed to the composition of the systems included in the meta-evaluation datasets. To control this bias, we propose a method that synthesizes translation systems in meta-evaluation. Our findings highlight the importance of understanding this tradeoff in meta-evaluation and its impact on metric rankings.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. Any repos shown below are weak matches — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{shayegh2025feeding,
  title  = {Feeding Two Birds or Favoring One? Adequacy-Fluency Tradeoffs in Evaluation and Meta-Evaluation of Machine Translation},
  author = {Behzad Shayegh and Jan-Thorsten Peter and David Vilar and Tobias Domhan and Juraj Juraska and Markus Freitag and Lili Mou},
  year   = {2025},
  eprint = {2509.20287},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.20287v1}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2509.20287.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2509.20287)

Discussion