ACL Findings2026
LQM: Linguistically Motivated Multidimensional Quality Metrics for Machine Translation
Samar Mohamed Magdy, Fakhraddin Alwajih, Abdellah El Mekki, Wesam El-Sayed, Muhammad Abdul-Mageed
Abstract
Existing MT evaluation frameworks, including automatic metrics and human evaluation schemes such as Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM), are largely language-agnostic. However, they often fail to capture dialect-and culture-specific errors in diglossic languages (e.g., Arabic), where translation failures stem from mismatches in language variety, content coverage, and pragmatic appropriateness rather than surface form alone. We introduce LQM: Linguistically Motivated Multidimensional Quality Metrics for MT. LQM is a hierarchical error taxonomy for diagnosing MT errors through six linguistically grounded levels: sociolinguistics, pragmatics, semantics, morphosyntax, orthography, and graphetics * Equal contribution (Figure 1). We construct a bidirectional parallel corpus of 3,850 sentences (550 per variety) spanning seven Arabic dialects (Egyptian, Emirati, Jordanian, Mauritanian, Moroccan, Palestinian, and Yemeni), derived from conversational, culturally rich content. We evaluate six LLMs in a zero-shot setting and conduct expert span-level human annotation using LQM, producing 6,113 labeled error spans across 3,495 unique erroneous sentences, along with severity-weighted quality scores. We complement this analysis with an automatic metric (spBLEU). Though validated here on Arabic, LQM is a language-agnostic framework designed to be easily applied to or adapted for other languages. LQM annotated errors data, prompts, and annotation guidelines are publicly available at https://github.com/ UBC-NLP/LQM_MT.
Ask Lune
Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.
Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.
Builds on8
- Benchmarking Machine Translation with Cultural AwarenessBinwei Yao, Ming Jiang, Tara Bobinac, Diyi Yang et al.EMNLP Findings 2024 · 48 citations
- Leveraging GPT-4 for Automatic Translation Post-EditingVikas Raunak, Amr Sharaf, Yiren Wang, Hany Hassan Awadalla et al.EMNLP Findings 2023 · 45 citations
- DRT: Deep Reasoning Translation via Long Chain-of-ThoughtJiaan Wang, Fandong Meng, Yunlong Liang, Jie ZhouACL Findings 2025 · 10 citations
- MT-R1-Zero: Advancing LLM-based Machine Translation via R1-Zero-like Reinforcement LearningZhaopeng Feng, Shaosheng Cao, Jiahan Ren, Jiayuan Su et al.EMNLP Findings 2025 · 9 citations
- Are Large Reasoning Models Good Translation Evaluators? Analysis and Performance BoostRunzhe Zhan, Zhihong Huang, Xinyi Yang, Lidia S. Chao et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 6 citations
Related papers
- HiMATE: A Hierarchical Multi-Agent Framework for Machine Translation EvaluationShijie Zhang, Renhao Li, Songsheng Wang, Philipp Koehn et al.EMNLP Findings 2025 · 2 citations
- Enhancing Human Evaluation in Machine Translation with Comparative JudgementYixiao Song, Parker Riley, Daniel Deutsch, Markus FreitagACL 2025 · 2 citations
- AL-QASIDA: Analyzing LLM Quality and Accuracy Systematically in Dialectal ArabicNathaniel Romney Robinson, Shahd Abdelmoneim, Kelly Marchisio, Sebastian RuderACL Findings 2025 · 2 citations
- Error Analysis of Multilingual Language Models in Machine Translation: A Case Study of English-Amharic TranslationHizkiel Alemayehu, Hamada M. Zahera, Axel-Cyrille Ngonga NgomoEMNLP 2024 · 1 citation
- DEMETR: Diagnosing Evaluation Metrics for TranslationMarzena Karpinska, Nishant Raj, Katherine Thai, Yixiao Song et al.EMNLP 2022 · 18 citations
