Sina Ahmadi, Micha David Hess, Elena Álvarez-Mellado, Alessia Battisti, Cui Ding, Anne Göhring, Yingqiang Gao, Zifan Jiang, Andrianos Michail, Peshmerge Morad, Joel Niklaus, Maria Christina Panagiotopoulou, Stefano Perrella, Juri Opitz, Anastassia Shaitarova, Rico Sennrich. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025.

Stefano Perrella, Lorenzo Proietti, Alessandro Scirè, Edoardo Barba, Roberto Navigli. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2024.

Word Sense Disambiguation (WSD) is a key task in Natural Language Processing (NLP), aiming to assign the correct meaning (sense) to a word in context. However, traditional WSD systems rely on WordNet as the underlying sense inventory, often differentiating meticulously between subtle nuances of word meanings, which may lead to excessive complexity and reduced practicality of WSD systems in today’s NLP. Indeed, current Pretrained Language Models (PLMs) do seem to be able to perform disambiguation, but it is not clear to what extent, or to what level of granularity, they actually operate. In this paper, we address these points and, firstly, introduce a new large-scale resource that leverages homonymy relations to systematically cluster WordNet senses, effectively reducing the granularity of word senses to a very coarse-grained level; secondly, we use this resource to train Homonymy Disambiguation systems and investigate whether PLMs are inherently able to differentiate coarse-grained word senses. Our findings demonstrate that, while state-of-the-art models still struggle to choose the correct fine-grained meaning of a word in context, Homonymy Disambiguation systems are able to differentiate homonyms with up to 95% accuracy scores even without fine-tuning the underlying PLM. We release our data and code at https://github.com/SapienzaNLP/homonymy-wsd.

Machine Translation (MT) evaluation metrics assess translation quality automatically.Recently, researchers have employed MT metrics for various new use cases, such as data filtering and translation re-ranking.However, most MT metrics return assessments as scalar scores that are difficult to interpret, posing a challenge to making informed design choices.Moreover, MT metrics' capabilities have historically been evaluated using correlation with human judgment, which, despite its efficacy, falls short of providing intuitive insights into metric performance, especially in terms of new metric use cases.To address these issues, we introduce an interpretable evaluation framework for MT metrics.Within this framework, we evaluate metrics in two scenarios that serve as proxies for the data filtering and translation re-ranking use cases.Furthermore, by measuring the performance of MT metrics using Precision, Recall, and F -score, we offer clearer insights into their capabilities than correlation with human judgments.Finally, we raise concerns regarding the reliability of manually curated data following the Direct Assessments+Scalar Quality Metrics (DA+SQM) guidelines, reporting a notably low agreement with Multidimensional Quality Metrics (MQM) annotations.