Oliver Cory

Oliver Cory, Ozge Mercanoglu Sincan, Matthew Vowels et al.

Sign Language Assessment (SLA) tools are useful to aid in language learning and are underdeveloped. Previous work has focused on isolated signs or comparison against a single reference video to assess Sign Languages (SL). This paper introduces a novel SLA tool designed to evaluate the comprehensibility of SL by modelling the natural distribution of human motion. We train our pipeline on data from native signers and evaluate it using SL learners. We compare our results to ratings from a human raters study and find strong correlation between human ratings and our tool. We visually demonstrate our tools ability to detect anomalous results spatio-temporally, providing actionable feedback to aid in SL learning and assessment.

Zifan Jiang, Colin Leong, Amit Moryossef et al.

We present a comprehensive study on meaningfully evaluating sign language utterances in the form of human skeletal poses. The study covers keypoint distance-based, embedding-based, and back-translation-based metrics. We show tradeoffs between different metrics in different scenarios through automatic meta-evaluation of sign-level retrieval and a human correlation study of text-to-pose translation across different sign languages. Our findings and the open-source pose-evaluation toolkit provide a practical and reproducible way of developing and evaluating sign language translation or generation systems.

Oliver Cory, Ozge Mercanoglu Sincan, Richard Bowden

This paper introduces SignAgent, a novel agentic framework that utilises Large Language Models (LLMs) for scalable, linguistically-grounded Sign Language (SL) annotation and dataset curation. Traditional computational methods for SLs often operate at the gloss level, overlooking crucial linguistic nuances, while manual linguistic annotation remains a significant bottleneck, proving too slow and expensive for the creation of large-scale, phonologically-aware datasets. SignAgent addresses these challenges through SignAgent Orchestrator, a reasoning LLM that coordinates a suite of linguistic tools, and SignGraph, a knowledge-grounded LLM that provides lexical and linguistic grounding. We evaluate our framework on two downstream annotation tasks. First, on Pseudo-gloss Annotation, where the agent performs constrained assignment, using multi-modal evidence to extract and order suitable gloss labels for signed sequences. Second, on ID Glossing, where the agent detects and refines visual clusters by reasoning over both visual similarity and phonological overlap to correctly identify and group lexical sign variants. Our results demonstrate that our agentic approach achieves strong performance for large-scale, linguistically-aware data annotation and curation.

Oliver Cory, Maksym Ivashechkin, Karahan Sahin et al.

Sign Languages (SLs) are the primary means of communication for millions of deaf individuals, yet existing evaluation metrics for generated SL remain simplistic and poorly aligned with human judgements. We introduce BackTranslation2.0, a linguistically grounded evaluation metric for text-to-sign translation that moves beyond naïve backtranslation. Our approach adopts an agentic framework in which a deterministic pipeline orchestrates a suite of specialised tools to assess four scoring dimensions - grammatical correctness, phonological accuracy, motion fluency, and generation fidelity - aligned with human rater assessments. Tool outputs are not treated independently: a set of large language model (LLM)-based cross-referential comparison modules evaluates consistency across tools and checks outputs against linguistic expectations, enabling structured reasoning over grammatical, phonological, and motion-level evidence. Final dimension scores are computed through deterministic weighted formulas over validated tool outputs. To validate BackTranslation2.0, we introduce and evaluate on a British Sign Language (BSL) dataset rated in a human rater study across the same quality dimensions, following a protocol developed in collaboration between linguists and deaf experts, benchmarking against six baseline metrics. Our method demonstrates strong correlation with human judgements across all dimensions, providing a more comprehensive, interpretable, and linguistically principled evaluation framework for sign language production systems.