What is the METEOR Score?

The METEOR Score – an acronym signifying ‘Metric for Evaluation of Translation with Explicit Ordering’ – serves as a pivotal metric within natural language processing: its purpose is to assess the quality of machine translation. This tool was conceived not merely out of necessity, but also in response to certain limitations inherent in the BLEU (Bilingual Evaluation Understudy) score. By offering more nuanced scrutiny over accuracy rates – thus providing improved precision – it outperforms its predecessor on multiple fronts. Within the realm of machine translation specifically, this becomes particularly pertinent – the aim here isn’t simply grammatical and semantic precision; rather, it extends to fluency coupled with idiomatic phrasing.

Understanding METEOR

The principle governing METEOR is the alignment of machine-generated translation words with those in a reference translation. This approach varies from BLEU, as METEOR places equal emphasis on precision and recall: precision refers to how accurately words from the machine translation align with their reference counterpart, whereas recall gauges this same accuracy but for reference words appearing in (not out of sync) with their respective machine translations. By adopting this dual focus – considering both under-translation and over-translation situations – METEOR provides an evaluation that is more balanced overall.

METEOR boasts several key features, among them its inclusion of synonyms and stemming. It acts under the philosophy that a superior translation might incorporate words distinct from the reference – provided they share equivalent meanings; this flexibility distinguishes it from BLEU. Indeed, with an exact word-for-word matching approach, BLEU does not possess this capability. Moreover, METEOR integrates word order considerations; this guarantees that the translated sentences – beyond merely possessing accurate vocabulary – retain a logical and grammatically sound structure. Let’s dive deeper into the key features and explain every single one in detail.

Key features of METEOR

  • Harmonizing Precision and Recall– METEOR’s primary innovation is a balanced consideration of both precision and recall. Two fundamental aspects in translation evaluation. Precision measures the ratio of words within machine-generated translations that align with those found in reference texts; meanwhile, recall gauges how well a given set-typically from an extensive body-captures all necessary terms for successful re-translation into another language. To calculate the METEOR score, this balance between precision and recall is quantified, offering a more accurate reflection of translation quality than metrics focusing on one aspect.
  • Use of Synonyms and Paraphrases– Unlike BLEU, which strictly relies on exact word-for-word matching, METEOR incorporates synonyms and paraphrases. This integration enables recognition of translations that utilize different words or phrases and yet still convey the identical meaning as the reference translation. Particularly in language capture- where multiple expressions can convey an identical meaning – the flexibility of this approach becomes vital. In other words, this aspect is particularly important in how to evaluate NLP models, as it accounts for the variety and flexibility of language use.
  • Stemming: In its evaluation process, METEOR incorporates stemming, which is a reduction of words to their base or root form. By recognizing different forms of the same word (e.g., “connect,” “connected,” “connection”) as similar, this feature adds another layer of sophistication to the assessment; it acknowledges and accounts for linguistic variations inherent in language use.
  • Word Order: METEOR critically attends to word order, an aspect BLEU largely overlooks; it penalizes translations with incorrect or unnatural syntactical structures. This crucial consideration ensures not only the accuracy of translated content but also its grammatical and stylistic coherence.
  • Language Specificity: Recognizing every language has its own grammar and meaning systems, we can change METEOR to work with many languages. This ability to adjust makes the evaluation of machine translation better and more suitable for use around the world, which is very important.
  • Adjustable Settings: The METEOR system is designed to be flexible, so you can change the settings for different tasks. You have the ability to fine-tune it whether your text is formal or casual or if there are special needs for translation evaluation. This way, you get a tailored method of assessment.

Comparison with BLEU Score

As one of the initial metrics for evaluating machine translations, the BLEU score employs an n-gram precision-based method: it juxtaposes the n-grams within an automated translation to those in a reference; subsequently, it calculates the score based on these matches. Because of its simplicity and broad effectiveness, BLEU is widely employed in many contexts. Notably, this method exhibits limitations: it is insensitive to meaning and fails to account for synonyms. Moreover, its considerations do not extend beyond fluency or grammatical correctness at the n-gram level.

Comparison to ROUGE Scores

The ROUGE (Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation) score, akin to BLEU and METEOR in context, primarily serves the purpose of evaluating text summarization along with other tasks that prioritize recall over precision. This measure ascertains the content overlap between a generated summary and an array of reference summaries. Particularly potent in tasks prioritizing core content capture over fluent language production, this evaluation method proves its effectiveness.


The METEOR score symbolizes a notable leap forward in evaluating machine translations. It overcomes several pivotal limitations of the BLEU score by adopting an even-handed approach that factors both precision and recall into its algorithm; furthermore, it considers issues such as synonymy and sentence structure – thus furnishing us with a more thorough gauge for translation quality. In tandem with other metrics such as BLEU and ROUGE – each tailored to distinct language evaluation elements – it forms part of our powerful toolkit: one robustly capable not only of assessing machine translation system performances but also tackling various linguistic processing tasks.



  • Reduce Risk
  • Simplify Compliance
  • Gain Visibility
  • Version Comparison