English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Pro

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Presents AI Discovery search usage as a premium feature

AI Discovery

Presents AI Discovery explain and summary usage as a premium feature

Content Analysis

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

1500 Top-up

3000 Top-up

Zendy Basic

2500 Top-up

Zendy Unlimited

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Precise evaluation metrics are important for assessing progress in high-level language generation tasks such as machine translation or image captioning. Historically, these metrics have been evaluated using correlation with human judgment. However, human-derived scores are often alarmingly inconsistent and are also limited in their ability to identify precise areas of weakness. In this paper, we perform a case study for metric evaluation by measuring the effect that systematic sentence transformations (e.g. active to passive voice) have on the automatic metric scores. These sentence “corruptions” serve as unit tests for precisely measuring the strengths and weaknesses of a given metric. We find that not only are human annotations heavily inconsistent in this study, but that the Metric Unit TesT analysis is able to capture precise shortcomings of particular metrics (e.g. comparing passive and active sentences) better than a simple correlation with human judgment can.

MUTT: Metric Unit TesTing for Language Generation Tasks