Machine translation & AI quality
How this is scored
What the machine translation does and how well it is controlled: the languages and language pairs covered, the engine (own neural or LLM model, or a choice of third-party engines such as DeepL, Google, Microsoft or an LLM), glossaries and formality applied during translation, document translation that keeps the layout (Word, PowerPoint, PDF, InDesign), custom or adaptive models trained on the customer's own translations, automatic quality estimation or scoring, and published evaluations of translation quality.
0 — No machine translation of any kind, and no way to connect an engine.
3 — Machine translation is offered or one engine can be connected; languages, glossary use and quality controls are basic or not described.
5 — Machine translation for the major European and world languages with the list published, glossaries applied during translation, a formality or tone setting, document translation that keeps formatting for common office formats, and either an own engine or a choice of several named engines.
8 — Custom or adaptive models that learn from the customer's translation memory or corrections, automatic quality estimation per segment with a threshold that routes weak segments to human review, LLM-based translation with style guides and context, engine selection per language pair stated, and a published quality evaluation with its method.
10 — Translation quality that an organisation can measure and steer: evaluations against named benchmarks or blind human review published with their method, quality estimation calibrated and explained, custom models with their training data and isolation documented, and every machine-translated segment traceable to the engine, model version and glossary that produced it.
The Data Protection Officer
The engines are named — Google Translate and DeepL — and Pro AI routes dynamically across the GPT, Claude and Gemini families with glossaries, style guides, screenshots and translation memory as context. Scoring against MQM criteria runs on every translation in real time and routes high-confidence strings to publish while flagging the rest for human review, and custom profiles adapt via retrieval over the customer's own translations rather than fine-tuning, which the documentation says is not supported. The published quality figures (a 92% acceptance rate versus roughly 60% with a single LLM) come without a stated evaluation method, which is what holds this below the top levels for me. 2 3 12 13