Skip to content
← Back to explorer

NepTam: A Nepali-Tamang Parallel Corpus and Baseline Machine Translation Experiments

Rupak Raj Ghimire, Bipesh Subedi, Balaram Prasain, Prakash Poudyal, Praveen Acharya, Nischal Karki, Rupak Tiwari, Rishikesh Kumar Sharma, Jenny Poudel, Bal Krishna Bal · Mar 14, 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

Modern Translation Systems heavily rely on high-quality, large parallel datasets for state-of-the-art performance. However, such resources are largely unavailable for most of the South Asian languages. Among them, Nepali and Tamang fall into such category, with Tamang being among the least digitally resourced languages in the region. This work addresses the gap by developing NepTam20K, a 20K gold standard parallel corpus, and NepTam80K, an 80K synthetic Nepali-Tamang parallel corpus, both sentence-aligned and designed to support machine translation. The datasets were created through a pipeline involving data scraping from Nepali news and online sources, pre-processing, semantic filtering, balancing for tense and polarity (in NepTam20K dataset), expert translation into Tamang by native speakers of the language, and verification by an expert Tamang linguist. The dataset covers five domains: Agriculture, Health, Education and Technology, Culture, and General Communication. To evaluate the dataset, baseline machine translation experiments were carried out using various multilingual pre-trained models: mBART, M2M-100, NLLB-200, and a vanilla Transformer model. The fine-tuning on the NLLB-200 achieved the highest sacreBLEU scores of 40.92 (Nepali-Tamang) and 45.26 (Tamang-Nepali).

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 40%

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.

"Modern Translation Systems heavily rely on high-quality, large parallel datasets for state-of-the-art performance."

Evaluation Modes

partial

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"Modern Translation Systems heavily rely on high-quality, large parallel datasets for state-of-the-art performance."

Quality Controls

partial

Gold Questions

Calibration/adjudication style controls detected.

"Modern Translation Systems heavily rely on high-quality, large parallel datasets for state-of-the-art performance."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"Modern Translation Systems heavily rely on high-quality, large parallel datasets for state-of-the-art performance."

Reported Metrics

missing

Not extracted

No metric anchors detected.

"Modern Translation Systems heavily rely on high-quality, large parallel datasets for state-of-the-art performance."

Rater Population

partial

Domain Experts

Helpful for staffing comparability.

"The datasets were created through a pipeline involving data scraping from Nepali news and online sources, pre-processing, semantic filtering, balancing for tense and polarity (in NepTam20K dataset), expert translation into Tamang by native speakers of the language, and verification by an expert Tamang linguist."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Domain Experts
  • Expertise required: Multilingual

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Gold Questions
  • 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

Modern Translation Systems heavily rely on high-quality, large parallel datasets for state-of-the-art performance.

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

Key Takeaways

  • Modern Translation Systems heavily rely on high-quality, large parallel datasets for state-of-the-art performance.
  • However, such resources are largely unavailable for most of the South Asian languages.
  • Among them, Nepali and Tamang fall into such category, with Tamang being among the least digitally resourced languages in the region.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Check the full text for explicit evaluation design choices (raters, protocol, and metrics).
  • 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.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • The fine-tuning on the NLLB-200 achieved the highest sacreBLEU scores of 40.92 (Nepali-Tamang) and 45.26 (Tamang-Nepali).

Why It Matters For Eval

  • Abstract shows limited direct human-feedback or evaluation-protocol detail; use as adjacent methodological context.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Pass: Quality control reporting appears

    Detected: Gold Questions

  • 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