Scoring
The composite score, translation metrics, the grounding gate, generalization, pose scoring, and leadership stability.
Composite score
S_total = 0.60·S_translation + 0.25·S_generalization + 0.15·S_pose
A submission that fails the grounding gate receives zero, regardless of the composite score.
Translation score
S_translation = 0.50·BLEURT_norm + 0.30·chrF_norm + 0.20·BLEU_norm
Computed over the studio, broadcast, and conversational slices only. The canary slice is deliberately excluded so that in-domain strength cannot hide a generalization collapse.
| Metric | Weight | Role |
|---|---|---|
| BLEURT | 0.50 | Primary semantic metric |
| chrF | 0.30 | Robust character-level overlap |
| BLEU | 0.20 | Retained for comparability with the literature |
Grounding gate
The problem
A fluent system can earn non-zero translation credit while completely ignoring the video. Unrelated English sentences from the same domain share vocabulary, register, and sentence shape, so a good language prior scores above zero on its own.
The test
Signet scores every hypothesis against two reference sets: the true references, and a deterministic derangement of those same references. A derangement is a shuffle in which no sentence stays matched with its own clip.
G = M(hypotheses, true references) / M(hypotheses, deranged references)
If a model is reading the video, it matches the true references much better than the shuffled ones and G rises above 1. If it is producing generic domain-shaped English, it scores about the same against both and G sits near 1.
The V1 gate
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Metric | chrF |
| Slice | Canary |
| Hard floor | G_canary < 1.25 → score zero, rejection code R14 |
The threshold is calibrated against the private corpus before economic enforcement.
The gate is a fraud and grounding floor, not a quality target. Passing it means "this model actually watched the video." It does not mean the translation is good.
Generalization
S_generalization = min(1.0, (BLEURT_canary / BLEURT_main) / 0.85)
This component is graded, not a hard zero. A broadly trained model may translate correctly while using a different English register from the reference interpreter, and that should cost points rather than disqualify.
The division of labour is precise:
- the grounding gate decides whether the video was genuinely read;
- the generalization component prices how well that ability transfers to the target operating conditions.
Pose score
Pose is scored with normalized, inverted DTW-PA-MPJPE over body and hand landmarks.
- Procrustes alignment (PA) removes camera translation, scale, and rotation.
- Dynamic time warping (DTW) removes harmless timing differences.
Pose is not the primary anti-cheat mechanism. It exists to create a common visual representation, provide a weak input-processing signal, and accumulate the data foundation for a later text-to-sign product line.
Leadership stability
The leaderboard is ranked by composite score. The leader changes only when the challenger's advantage is significant under a paired bootstrap at p < 0.05.
This exists so that the commercially deployed champion does not change because of sampling noise.
Summary of what each component defends
| Component | Weight | Defends against |
|---|---|---|
| Translation | 0.60 | Weak output quality |
| Generalization | 0.25 | Overfitting to in-domain conditions |
| Pose | 0.15 | Bypassing visual processing entirely |
| Grounding gate | pass/fail | Language-prior bluffing and clip lookup |
| Paired bootstrap | ranking | Noise-driven champion churn |