MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1705212287 · doi:10.7202/1064050ar

Community interpreting in Sweden and its significance to guaranteeing legal and medical security

2010· article· en· W1705212287 on OpenAlex
Eva Norström

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSens public · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpreterInterpretation (philosophy)Ideal (ethics)Political sciencePresentation (obstetrics)Order (exchange)LawSociologyPublic relationsBusinessMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this presentation, I deal with the legal situation in Sweden concerning the right to interpretation. I discuss the philosophy behind the right to interpretation given to public servants, medical staff as well as immigrants and minorities in Sweden. I also deal with the question of who the ideal interpreter is. What kind of education is offered and what skills are fundamental to master? What further skills are required, besides language and factual knowledge, in order to maintain legal and medical security? What are the codes of ethics? Furthermore, I compare this with the reality of the interpreter. What is his or her legal status and working conditions? Finally, I discuss who is responsible for guaranteeing legal and medical rights and why access to professional interpreting in the public sector is a concern of the state.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.370 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it