Máté Metzger

Máté Metzger, Nadnapang Phophichit, Hansa Dhammahaso

Single-score translation metrics can conflate legitimate variation with error, a problem especially acute for classical languages where multiple defensible English renderings of the same passage coexist. We audit Pali-to-English output from four flagship large language models (LLMs): GPT-5.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Gemini 3.1 Pro, and Grok 4.3, on 1,700 passages from the Pali Canon, using three established human translations by Bhikkhu Sujato, Thanissaro Bhikkhu, and Bhikkhu Bodhi as a local reference envelope rather than a single gold standard. Each candidate's normalized embedding drift from the reference centroid serves as a triage signal, not an error label; the 1,203 candidates above a 1.5 drift threshold are then adjudicated by a blinded three-model LLM judge panel, calibrated against a 300-instance author-adjudicated validation set. Two results stand out. First, drift predicts severity rather than error per se: the major-error rate among adjudicated high-drift candidates rose monotonically from 7.9% in the 1.5-2.0 band to 51.6% above 3.0, while approximately 80% of 1.5-2.0 outliers were judged valid translation variations. Second, model differences were clearest in the high-drift tail: GPT-5.5 had the lowest adjudicated high-drift major-error rate, with confidence intervals overlapping those of Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Gemini 3.1 Pro; Grok 4.3 had both the largest outlier volume and the highest tail major-error rate (27.6% overall, 74.4% above drift 3.0). The dominant major-error categories (e.g. omission or truncation, doctrinal term errors) are precisely the failures most likely to mislead readers of doctrinal text. The contribution is a reusable audit design for classical-to-modern translation: define a local reference envelope from multiple human translators, use embedding drift to prioritize review, and adjudicate the flagged tail rather than treating outlier status as error.

Máté Metzger, Nadnapang Phophichit

Digital humanities projects increasingly rely on machine translation and large language models to widen access to classical, religious, and otherwise under-translated textual traditions. Yet standard translation benchmarks are poorly suited to such materials: they typically compare a system output against a single reference translation, even though classical texts often support multiple faithful renderings that differ in terminology, register, and interpretation. This article introduces PaliBench, both a benchmark for Pali-to-English translation and a reusable method for constructing multi-reference translation benchmarks for classical languages. The Pali case study draws on passages from the Sutta Pitaka aligned with independent English translations by Bhikkhu Sujato, Bhikkhu Thanissaro, and Bhikkhu Bodhi. The workflow combines LLM-assisted alignment of independently segmented translations, automated verification against source files, passage-level quality filtering, deduplication of formulaic repetitions, and multi-metric evaluation against multiple human references. The resulting benchmark contains 1,700 passages spanning 8,389 segments and approximately 345,000 tokens. We use it to evaluate ten contemporary large language models with complementary metrics, finding strong cross-metric concordance in system rankings alongside substantial variation in reliability and semantic outlier rates. The broader contribution is methodological: PaliBench shows how existing scholarly translations can be transformed into evaluation infrastructure for interpretive textual traditions without treating any single translation as definitive. Although developed for Pali Buddhist texts, the approach could be portable to other classical corpora where sufficient independent reference translations exist.