rubrics/TRANSLATION_REVIEW.md

Translation review rubric

Review the canonical claims, source evidence, and target-language surface together. A reviewer must not grade fluency while ignoring whether the caption is true of the evidence.

Severity

Severity	Meaning	Examples
Critical	Changes the training target or contradicts evidence	wrong action, object, actor, hand, negation, quantity, direction, state, outcome, or timestamp
Major	Drops or invents a material distinction	missing tool, source/destination, bimanual coordination, uncertainty, goal, error or recovery
Minor	Meaning remains usable but expression is degraded	awkward word order, punctuation, nonpreferred terminology without ambiguity

Any critical error rejects the row. A major error requires correction and re-review. Minor errors are counted by language and construction so systematic problems cannot hide inside an average.

Review dimensions

1. Evidence fidelity: every expressed claim is supported by its cited frame, interval, sensor, source label, or human judgment.
2. Action structure: predicate, actor, patient, instrument, source, destination, manner, goal, and result remain distinct.
3. Hands and bodies: ego versus other person, left/right, visibility, contact, functional role, and bimanual coordination are preserved or marked unknown.
4. Objects and state: object identity, attributes, containment, contact, before/after state, and outcome are not merged or hallucinated.
5. Time and granularity: point, interval, atomic action, task phase, and whole activity are not treated as synonyms.
6. Communicative meaning: observation, directive, question, uncertainty, register, polarity, aspect, modality, and reported speech remain explicit.
7. Language quality: terminology, grammar, naturalness, locale, and audience are appropriate without adding unsupported facts.
8. Provenance: source record, revision, evidence selectors, producer, method, review state, and loss ledger remain attached.

Language-specific checks

Simplified Chinese (zh-Hans)

• Do not infer aspect particles, classifiers, completedness, or omitted arguments from English.
• Check disposal/passive constructions such as 把 and 被 against semantic roles.
• Confirm that serial actions remain ordered and separate.
• Do not depend on whitespace tokenization.

Tagalog (tl)

• Review verbal voice and pivot together with ang, ng, and sa phrases.
• Do not force English subject–verb–object order onto the target.
• Preserve actor versus patient prominence and source/destination roles.
• Tag code-switched spans instead of silently normalizing them.

Spanish (es)

• Separate grammatical gender from physical-world attributes.
• Check number, determiner, person, register, and imperative morphology.
• Preserve reflexive constructions, clitic roles, and source/destination.

Hindi (hi, experimental)

• Check case/postpositions, agreement, aspect, word order, and politeness.
• Do not infer gender or honorific commitments without evidence.

English (en)

• Distinguish observation from imperative fragments.
• Do not use articles or pronouns to invent definiteness, identity, or gender.

Reviewer independence

Model output is a candidate. The producing model cannot approve its own row. High-risk or benchmark rows require two independent bilingual judgments and adjudication of disagreements. Review records bind the source revision, canonical claim set, exact target text, rubric version, and reviewer decision.