Lune

EMNLP2025Top-tier venue

Should I Share this Translation? Evaluating Quality Feedback for User Reliance on Machine Translation

Dayeon Ki, Kevin Duh, Marine Carpuat

2025Year
1Top-tier citations

Abstract

As people increasingly use AI systems in work and daily life, mechanisms that help them use AI responsibly are urgently needed, especially when they are not equipped to verify AI predictions themselves. We study a realistic Machine Translation (MT) scenario where monolingual users decide whether to share an MT output, first without and then with quality feedback. We compare four types of quality feedback: explicit feedback that directly give users an assessment of translation quality using (1) error highlights and (2) LLM explanations, and implicit feedback that helps users compare MT inputs and outputs through (3) backtranslation and ( 4 ) question-answer (QA) tables. We find that all feedback types, except error highlights, significantly improve both decision accuracy and appropriate reliance. Notably, implicit feedback, especially QA tables, yields significantly greater gains than explicit feedback in terms of decision accuracy, appropriate reliance, and user perceptions -receiving the highest ratings for helpfulness and trust, and the lowest for mental burden. 1

Ask about this paper

Your agent reads all of it.

Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.

Questions to start from

Your agent calls

Luneget_paper_fulltext

Ask in Lune

Free to start. No credit card required.

Cited by top-tier papers1

Ask how each one uses it

Builds on19

Related papers

Dusk over the sea between two cliffs drawn in fine vertical lines