HULAT2 at MER-TRANS 2026: Governed Multi-Agent Simplification for Spanish Easy-to-Read Generation
Authors: Lourdes Moreno, Paloma Martínez, Marco Antonio Sanchez-Escudero, Miguel Domínguez-Gómez
Organizations: Computer Science and Engineering Department, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Av. Universidad, 30, Leganés, 28911, Spain
Abstract
This paper describes the participation of HULAT2-UC3M in the Spanish track of MER-TRANS 2026, a shared task on multilingual Easy-to-Read translation. Three fully automatic Spanish runs were submitted. RUN1 and RUN2 used a LangGraph-based multi-agent workflow combining Gemini 2.5 Flash and RigoChat-7B-v2, parallel generation strategies, internal quality signals, Event-Condition-Action routing, controlled editing and traceable decisions. RUN1 used the base workflow, while RUN2 activated an additional lexical-support layer based on a glossary and lexical resources. RUN3 was a RigoChat-based generate-evaluate-regenerate baseline with prompt engineering and LoRA-based adaptation. The official leaderboard reports BLEU-Orig, BLEU-Gold, SARI and BERTScore. During development, additional internal signals were also inspected, including semantic fidelity, readability, lexical simplicity, syntactic clarity and factual consistency. According to official SARI, RUN1 was the best HULAT2 run, with 44.0543 points, followed by RUN2 with 43.1049 and RUN3 with 38.5136. These results indicate that, in this task setting, signal-guided multi-agent routing outperformed the linear regeneration baseline. They also show that adding lexical support did not automatically improve reference-based scores. Further segment-level and document-level analysis are required to assess readability, factual consistency and user-oriented adequacy.
Multi-agent LLM architectures, such as LangChain and AutoGen, largely assume English as the lingua franca for internal inter-agent communication, even when the end-user task is non-English. We fill this gap by evaluating a two-agent extraction-answer core, with an additional back-translation agent in the English-forced condition, across four typologically diverse languages (Hindi, Chinese, Spanish, Arabic; n = 300 per language) using the Aya-23-8B model. We compare a native-language pipeline to an English-forced one (which incorporates a final back-translation step from English to the user's language). We discover a statistically significant English-Forcing Tax (surviving a strict Bonferroni correction) that isolates the cost of English routing from general multi-agent orchestration overhead. Forcing inter-agent communication through English reduces Exact Match accuracy by 13.0 percentage points (Spanish) up to 30.6 percentage points (Hindi) compared to native-language multi-agent execution. Using chrF scores as a diagnostic measure of English-reference lexical overlap, we find that lower overlap is strongly associated with pipeline failure, consistent with translation loss being an important contributor to the observed performance drop. These findings suggest a compelling case for native-language routing in agent frameworks when the source and target languages are typologically distant, reducing a compounding translation tax.
Modern translation workflows demand more than semantic equivalence. Users routinely require models to preserve JSON or HTML schemas, honor curated glossaries, disambiguate with provided context, and match prescribed registers, often several at once. Conventional metrics such as BLEU and xCOMET capture semantic fidelity but provide little signal on constraint adherence, while general instruction following benchmarks ignore the cross-lingual nature of translation. We introduce \bench, a benchmark for multilingual translation instruction following covering seven languages, with 4,506 single-constraint and 2,838 multi-constraint items spanning six constraint dimensions and five compositional patterns with instructions issued in all seven languages. Constraints are split into a gating subset verified by deterministic checkers and a continuous subset scored by a rubric-based LLM judge, combined under a multiplicative rule that resists reward hacking. Evaluating 15 models reveals systematic gaps that prior protocols miss: Instruction following scales with size more sharply than translation quality, glossary and structured-format constraints dominate the difficulty gradient, and general instruction following rankings correlate only weakly with translation behavior. Our benchmark are available at https://github.com/Tencent-Hunyuan/Hy-MT2/tree/main/IFMTBench.
AI translation of literary works is increasingly common. While the content may be rendered adequately, we do not know enough about how readers experience it in terms of immersiveness and literary effect-aspects poorly captured by automatic metrics or human evaluation targeting fluency and adequacy. We ask 15 avid readers to compare recently published human translations (HT) to machine translations (MT) generated with an agentic language model-based pipeline, for 15 recent novels in French, Polish, and Japanese translated into English. Readers evaluated approximately 8K-word excerpts in two conditions: immersive reading of the whole excerpt (30 comparisons) and close reading of 386 aligned HT-MT chunk pairs (772 comparisons), with two readers per book. Overall, readers find MT "fine", but prefer HT (descriptively at the excerpt level, 19/30, and significantly at the chunk level, 522/772) for its ease, clarity, and immersive nature. Readers' highlights show that MT's quality varies more within one book than HT's does. Crucially, readers cannot reliably tell the two apart (17/30 guess correctly) and tend to prefer the version they believe to be human. Automatic metrics, including LLM-as-a-judge approaches, fail to recover reader preferences and favor MT. We release LAIT (Literary AI Translation), a reader-centered evaluation dataset with 1K reader comments, 2K judgments and preference ratings, and 7.2K span-level annotations, along with our evaluation protocol and supporting interface.