Abstract:This study aims to analyse how translation experts from the German department of the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Translation (DGT) identify and correct different error categories in neural machine translated texts (NMT) and their post-edited versions (NMTPE). The term translation expert encompasses translator, post-editor as well as revisor. Even though we focus on neural machine-translated segments, translator and post-editor are used synonymously because of the combined workflow using CAT-Tools as well as machine translation. Only the distinction between post-editor, which refers to a DGT translation expert correcting the neural machine translation output, and revisor, which refers to a DGT translation expert correcting the post-edited version of the neural machine translation output, is important and made clear whenever relevant. Using an automatic error annotation tool and the more fine-grained manual error annotation framework to identify characteristic error categories in the DGT texts, a corpus analysis revealed that quality assurance measures by post-editors and revisors of the DGT are most often necessary for lexical errors. More specifically, the corpus analysis showed that, if post-editors correct mistranslations, terminology or stylistic errors in an NMT sentence, revisors are likely to correct the same error type in the same post-edited sentence, suggesting that the DGT experts were being primed by the NMT output. Subsequently, we designed a controlled eye-tracking and key-logging experiment to compare participants’ eye movements for test sentences containing the three identified error categories (mistranslations, terminology or stylistic errors) and for control sentences without errors. We examined the three error types’ effect on early (first fixation durations, first pass durations) and late eye movement measures (e.g., total reading time and regression path durations). Linear mixed-effects regression models predict what kind of behaviour of the DGT experts is associated with the correction of different error types during the post-editing process.

Neural Machine Translation with BERT for Post-OCR Error Detection and Correction

Neural OCR Post-Hoc Correction of Historical Corpora

Document-level Neural Machine Translation Using BERT As Context Encoder

Confidence-Aware Document OCR Error Detection

Reference-Based Post-OCR Processing with LLM for Diacritic Languages

Computer Assisted Translation with Neural Quality Estimation and Automatic Post-Editing

A Supervised Machine Learning Approach for Post-OCR Error Detection for Historical Text

Survey of Post-OCR Processing Approaches

Enhancing OCR Performance through Post-OCR Models: Adopting Glyph Embedding for Improved Correction

Neural Language Correction with Character-Based Attention

Translation Quality and Error Recognition in Professional Neural Machine Translation Post-Editing

Better Neural Machine Translation by Extracting Linguistic Information from BERT

Enhancing image-based Arabic document translation using noisy channel correction model.

A Model for Geographical Named Entity Recognition and Correction Based on Deep Neural Networks and the BERT Model

OCR Error Correction Using Character Correction and Feature-Based Word Classification

Incorporating BERT into Neural Machine Translation

Towards Making the Most of BERT in Neural Machine Translation

OCR Post Correction for Endangered Language Texts

A Combination of BERT and Transformer for Vietnamese Spelling Correction

Post-OCR Document Correction with large Ensembles of Character Sequence Models