Get away with less: Need of source side data curation to build parallel corpus for low resource Machine Translation

Saumitra Yadav, Manish Shrivastava · Jan 13, 2026 · Citations: 0

Automatic Metrics

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

Data curation is a critical yet under-researched step in the machine translation training paradigm. To train translation systems, data acquisition relies primarily on human translations and digital parallel sources or, to a limited degree, synthetic generation. But, for low-resource languages, human translation to generate sufficient data is prohibitively expensive. Therefore, it is crucial to develop a framework that screens source sentences to form efficient parallel text, ensuring optimal MT system performance in low-resource environments. We approach this by evaluating English-Hindi bi-text to determine effective sentence selection strategies for optimal MT system training. Our extensively tested framework, (Lexical And Linguistically Informed Text Analysis) LALITA, targets source sentence selection using lexical and linguistic features to curate parallel corpora. We find that by training mostly on complex sentences from both existing and synthetic datasets, our method significantly improves translation quality. We test this by simulating low-resource data availabilty with curated datasets of 50K to 800K English sentences and report improved performances on all data sizes. LALITA demonstrates remarkable efficiency, reducing data needs by more than half across multiple languages (Hindi, Odia, Nepali, Norwegian Nynorsk, and German). This approach not only reduces MT systems training cost by reducing training data requirement, but also showcases LALITA's utility in data augmentation.

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 35%

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.