PaperScope
LIVE · 2026-09-09 05:40 UTC

When Metrics Reward the Worst Translations: Internalizing Cultural Reasoning for Social Media Translation Evaluation

Yiwen Qiu, Linjuan Wu, Dingming Li, Yizhou Liu, Zixuan Wang, Haolei Xu, Ye Guo, Daoxin Zhang, Weiming Lu, Yongliang Shen

Latestcs.CLcs.LGcs.AIcs.CV
arXiv ID
2609.08156 v1
Category
Submitted
2026-09-08

Abstract

Automatic translation quality metrics trained on general-domain corpora systematically fail on social media content, where communicative intent is encoded in culturally loaded expressions (internet slang, homophonic ciphers, and platform-specific idioms) rather than surface token patterns. We conduct a systematic empirical analysis demonstrating that standard metrics including COMET, XCOMET, and BERTScore exhibit near-zero or negative correlation with human cultural judgments, and even display a severity inversion in which scores increase as translation quality deteriorates. We further show that this failure extends to large language model judges: Qwen3-235B achieves Cohen's kappa of only 0.162, revealing that the bottleneck is not reasoning capacity but cultural grounding: models lack the domain-specific cultural knowledge needed to identify which aspects of a translation require scrutiny. To address this, we propose CuRIL, a reinforcement learning framework that internalizes cultural reasoning: cultural annotations are prepended inside the model's reasoning, excluded from policy gradients via a token-level loss mask, and injected with a probability that decays to zero over training, progressively forcing autonomous cultural judgment. On a 1,444-sample human-annotated social media translation benchmark, Qwen3-8B trained with CuRIL achieves Cohen's kappa 0.370 and Exact Match accuracy of 45.22%, approaching Gemini-3.1-Pro with 30x fewer parameters and surpassing models up to 235B in scale. We further demonstrate that our judge produces reliable reward signals for downstream translation optimization, reducing the low-quality translation rate by over 20 percentage points under independent human evaluation.

arXiv abs page · PDF · same-day batch