Les nomenclatures anatomiques: histoire et traduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolLas nomenclaturas anatomicas internacionales datan de finales del siglo xix. Surgieron en un momento en el que la pletora terminologica obstaculizaba la comunicacion entre los expertos, por lo que ha resultado dificil implantarlas. La traduccion desempena un papel fundamental en esta dinamica, pero cuesta encontrar el hilo de Ariadna porque la relacion entre la nomenclatura internacional y sus adaptaciones o sus rivales nacionales es compleja. Proponemos, pues, una tipologia de los principales problemas que entranan las nomenclaturas internacionales y francesas, y una estrategia de trabajo que podria aplicarse a todos los pares de lenguas. EnglishInternational anatomical nomenclatures date from the end of the 19th century. They appeared at a time when the plethora of terms hampered communication among experts, which made implementation of these nomenclatures difficult. Translation plays a fundamental role in this dynamic, but the relationship between the international nomenclature and its national adaptations or rivals is complex, and finding an Ariadne�s thread to guide us through this labyrinth of terms can be difficult. We therefore propose a typology of the major problems of both French and international nomenclatures, as well as a working strategy that could be applied to all language pairs. francaisLes nomenclatures anatomiques internationales remontent a la fin du xixe siecle. Apparues a un moment ou la plethore terminologique handicape la communication entre experts, leur implantation est difficile. La traduction joue un role essentiel dans cette dynamique, mais il est difficile de trouver le fil d�Ariane, car le rapport entre la nomenclature internationale et leurs adaptations ou leurs concurrentes nationales est complexe. Nous proposons donc une typologie des problemes principaux lies aux nomenclatures internationales et francaises, ainsi qu�une strategie de travail potentiellement applicable a toutes les paires de langues.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".