Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for creative tasks such as literary translation. Yet translational creativity remains underexplored and is rarely evaluated at scale, while source-text comprehension is typically studied in isolation, despite the fact that, in professional translation, comprehension and creativity are tightly intertwined. We address these gaps with a paired-task framework applied to literary excerpts from 11 books. Task 1 assesses source-text comprehension, and Task 2 evaluates translational creativity through Units of Creative Potential (UCPs), such as metaphors and wordplay. Using a scalable evaluation setup that combines expert human annotations with UCP-based automatic scoring, we benchmark 23 models and four creativity-oriented prompts. Our findings show that strong comprehension does not translate into human-level creativity: models often produce literal or contextually inappropriate renderings, with particularly large gaps for the more distant English-Chinese language pair. Creativity-oriented prompts yield only modest gains, and only one model, Mistral-Large, comes close to human-level creativity (0.167 vs. 0.246). Across all model-prompt combinations, only three exceed a creativity score of 0.1, while the rest remain at or near zero.
Abstract:Interpretability can be implemented as a means to understand decisions taken by (black box) models, such as machine translation (MT) or large language models (LLMs). Yet, research in this area has been limited in relation to a manifested problem in these models: gender bias. With this research, we aim to move away from simply measuring bias to exploring its origins. Working with gender-ambiguous natural source data, this study examines which context, in the form of input tokens in the source sentence, influences (or triggers) the translation model choice of a certain gender inflection in the target language. To analyse this, we use contrastive explanations and compute saliency attribution. We first address the challenge of a lacking scoring threshold and specifically examine different attribution levels of source words on the model gender decisions in the translation. We compare salient source words with human perceptions of gender and demonstrate a noticeable overlap between human perceptions and model attribution. Additionally, we provide a linguistic analysis of salient words. Our work showcases the relevance of understanding model translation decisions in terms of gender, how this compares to human decisions and that this information should be leveraged to mitigate gender bias.