Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Open Machine Translation for Esperanto

Ona de Gibert, Lluís de Gibert · Mar 31, 2026 · Citations: 0

Human Eval
Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Esperanto is a widespread constructed language, known for its regular grammar and productive word formation. Besides having substantial resources available thanks to its online community, it remains relatively underexplored in the context of modern machine translation (MT) approaches. In this work, we present the first comprehensive evaluation of open-source MT systems for Esperanto, comparing rule-based systems, encoder-decoder models, and LLMs across model sizes. We evaluate translation quality across six language directions involving English, Spanish, Catalan, and Esperanto using multiple automatic metrics as well as human evaluation. Our results show that the NLLB family achieves the best performance in all language pairs, followed closely by our trained compact models and a fine-tuned general-purpose LLM. Human evaluation confirms this trend, with NLLB translations preferred in approximately half of the comparisons, although noticeable errors remain. In line with Esperanto's tradition of openness and international collaboration, we release our code and best-performing models publicly.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
  • The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
  • The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.
Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 30%

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"Esperanto is a widespread constructed language, known for its regular grammar and productive word formation."

Evaluation Modes

partial

Human Eval

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Esperanto is a widespread constructed language, known for its regular grammar and productive word formation."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"Esperanto is a widespread constructed language, known for its regular grammar and productive word formation."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"Esperanto is a widespread constructed language, known for its regular grammar and productive word formation."

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"Esperanto is a widespread constructed language, known for its regular grammar and productive word formation."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Not reported
  • Expertise required: Coding, Multilingual

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes: Human Eval
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: Low
  • Use this page as: Background context only

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Esperanto is a widespread constructed language, known for its regular grammar and productive word formation.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • Esperanto is a widespread constructed language, known for its regular grammar and productive word formation.
  • Besides having substantial resources available thanks to its online community, it remains relatively underexplored in the context of modern machine translation (MT) approaches.
  • In this work, we present the first comprehensive evaluation of open-source MT systems for Esperanto, comparing rule-based systems, encoder-decoder models, and LLMs across model sizes.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Human evaluation) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended Queries

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • In this work, we present the first comprehensive evaluation of open-source MT systems for Esperanto, comparing rule-based systems, encoder-decoder models, and LLMs across model sizes.
  • We evaluate translation quality across six language directions involving English, Spanish, Catalan, and Esperanto using multiple automatic metrics as well as human evaluation.
  • Human evaluation confirms this trend, with NLLB translations preferred in approximately half of the comparisons, although noticeable errors remain.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • In this work, we present the first comprehensive evaluation of open-source MT systems for Esperanto, comparing rule-based systems, encoder-decoder models, and LLMs across model sizes.
  • We evaluate translation quality across six language directions involving English, Spanish, Catalan, and Esperanto using multiple automatic metrics as well as human evaluation.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Human Eval

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Gap: Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Create Account & Post a Job
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
Learn About Managed Service
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.
Join Now