The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Improving Translation Faithfulness of Large Language Models via Augmenting Instructions
Open accessAbstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) present strong general capabilities, and a current compelling challenge is stimulating their specialized capabilities, such as machine translation, through low-cost instruction tuning. The standard instruction-following data is sequentially organized as the concatenation of an instruction, an input, and a response. As the attention mechanism of LLMs has limitations on local focus, LLMs tend to focus more on the words or sentences nearby at each position. This leads to a high risk of instruction forgetting during decoding. To alleviate the above issues, We propose SWIE (Segment-Weighted Instruction Embedding) and an instruction-following dataset OVERMISS. SWIE improves the model instruction understanding by adding a global instruction representation on the following input and response representations. OVERMISS improves model faithfulness by comparing over-translation and miss-translation results with the correct translation. We apply our methods to two main-stream open-source LLMs, BLOOM and LLaMA. The experimental results demonstrate significant improvements in translation performance with SWIE based on BLOOMZ-3b, particularly in zero-shot and long text translations due to reduced instruction forgetting risk. Additionally, OVERMISS outperforms the baseline in translation performance (e.g. an increase in BLEU scores from 0.69 to 3.12 and an average improvement of 0.48 percentage comet scores for LLaMA-7b) with further enhancements seen in models combining OVERMISS and SWIE (e.g. the BLUE scores increase up to 0.56 from English to German across three different backbones), and both exhibit improvements in the faithfulness metric based on word alignment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In such cases, there is even a heightened susceptibility to the risk of instruction forgetting [46, 193].”
From A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questions (2025) · cites this paper as [46]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models
Wei, J., Tay, Y., Bommasani, R., Raffel, C., Zoph, B., Borgeaud, S., Yogatama, D., Bosma, M., Zhou, D., Metzler, D., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2206.07682 · Cited by 1,264
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- Eunbi Choi, Yongrae Jo, Joel Jang, and Minjoon Seo. 2022. Prompt injection: Parameterization of fixed inputs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.11349. · arXiv
- David Dale, Elena Voita, Janice Lam, Prangthip Hansanti, Christophe Ropers, Elahe Kalbassi, Cyn- thia Gao, Loïc Barrault, and Marta R Costa-jussà. 2023. Halomi: A manually annotated bench- mark for multilingual hallucination and omission detection in machine translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.11746. · arXiv
- Javier Ferrando, Gerard I Gállego, Belen Alastruey, Car- los Escolano, and Marta R Costa-jussà. 2022. To- wards opening the black box of neural machine trans- lation: Source and target interpretations of the trans- former. In Proceedings of the 2022 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 8756-8769.
- Yingbo Gao, Christian Herold, Zijian Yang, and Her- mann Ney. 2022. Is encoder-decoder redundant for neural machine translation? In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference of the Asia-Pacific Chapter of the As- sociation for Computational Linguistics and the 12th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, pages 562-574.
- Zhiwei He, Tian Liang, Wenxiang Jiao, Zhuosheng Zhang, Yujiu Yang, Rui Wang, Zhaopeng Tu, Shum- ing Shi, and Xing Wang. 2023. Exploring human- like translation strategy with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.04118. · arXiv
- Amr Hendy, Mohamed Abdelrehim, Amr Sharaf, Vikas Raunak, Mohamed Gabr, Hitokazu Matsushita, Young Jin Kim, Mohamed Afify, and Hany Hassan Awadalla. 2023. How good are gpt models at ma- chine translation? a comprehensive evaluation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.09210. · arXiv
- Or Honovich, Thomas Scialom, Omer Levy, and Timo Schick. 2022. Unnatural instructions: Tuning lan- guage models with (almost) no human labor. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.09689. · arXiv
- Wenxiang Jiao, Jen-tse Huang, Wenxuan Wang, Xing Wang, Shuming Shi, and Zhaopeng Tu. 2023a. Par- rot: Translating during chat using large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.02426. · arXiv
- Wenxiang Jiao, Wenxuan Wang, JT Huang, Xing Wang, and ZP Tu. 2023b. Is chatgpt a good transla- tor? yes with gpt-4 as the engine. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.08745. · arXiv
- Nelson F Liu, Kevin Lin, John Hewitt, Ashwin Paran- jape, Michele Bevilacqua, Fabio Petroni, and Percy Liang. 2023. Lost in the middle: How lan- guage models use long contexts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.03172. · arXiv
- Shayne Longpre, Le Hou, Tu Vu, Albert Webson, Hyung Won Chung, Yi Tay, Denny Zhou, Quoc V Le, Barret Zoph, Jason Wei, et al. 2023. The flan collection: Designing data and methods for effective instruction tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.13688. · arXiv
- Mathias Müller, Annette Rios, and Rico Sennrich. 2020. Domain robustness in neural machine translation. pages 151-164.
- Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei- Jing Zhu. 2002. Bleu: a method for automatic evalu- ation of machine translation. In Proceedings of the 40th annual meeting of the Association for Computa- tional Linguistics, pages 311-318.
- Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. 2020. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text trans- former. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 21(1):5485-5551.
- Vikas Raunak, Arul Menezes, and Marcin Junczys- Dowmunt. 2021. The curious case of hallucinations in neural machine translation. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Hu- man Language Technologies, pages 1172-1183.
- Vikas Raunak, Amr Sharaf, Hany Hassan Awadallah, and Arul Menezes. 2023. Leveraging gpt-4 for automatic translation post-editing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.14878. · arXiv
- Yizhong Wang, Swaroop Mishra, Pegah Alipoormo- labashi, Yeganeh Kordi, Amirreza Mirzaei, Atharva Naik, Arjun Ashok, Arut Selvan Dhanasekaran, An- jana Arunkumar, David Stap, et al. 2022. Super- naturalinstructions: Generalization via declarative instructions on 1600+ nlp tasks. pages 5085-5109.
- Seonghyeon Ye, Doyoung Kim, Joel Jang, Joongbo Shin, and Minjoon Seo. 2022. Guess the instruction! flipped learning makes language models stronger zero-shot learners. In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations.
- Jiali Zeng, Fandong Meng, Yongjing Yin, and Jie Zhou. 2023. Tim: Teaching large language mod- els to translate with comparison. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04408. · arXiv
- Shaolei Zhang, Qingkai Fang, Zhuocheng Zhang, Zhen- grui Ma, Yan Zhou, Langlin Huang, Mengyu Bu, Shangtong Gui, Yunji Chen, Xilin Chen, et al. 2023. Bayling: Bridging cross-lingual alignment and instruction following through interactive trans- lation for large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.10968. · arXiv
- Wayne Xin Zhao, Kun Zhou, Junyi Li, Tianyi Tang, Xiaolei Wang, Yupeng Hou, Yingqian Min, Beichen Zhang, Junjie Zhang, Zican Dong, et al. 2023. A survey of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.18223. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Huang, L., Yu, W., Ma, W., Zhong, W., Feng, Z., Wang, H., Chen, Q., Peng, W., Feng, X., Qin, B., et al. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3703155 · Cited by 4,688
Huang, L., Yu, W., Ma, W., Zhong, W., Feng, Z., Wang, H., Chen, Q., Peng, W., Feng, X., Qin, B., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.05232 · Cited by 2,516
“In such cases, there is even a heightened susceptibility to the risk of instruction forgetting (Chen et al., 2023f; Liu et al., 2023i).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, Y., Liu, Y., Meng, F., Chen, Y., Xu, J., & Zhou, J.
- Affiliations
- Beijing Jiaotong University (CN)
- Tencent (China) (CN)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2308.12674
- OpenAlex
- W4386185326
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Translation Studies and Practices
- Keywords
- machine translation, large language models, instruction tuning, translation fidelity, zero-shot translation, word alignment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review