MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1966033174 · doi:10.7202/003743ar

Les interprètes japonais en Algérie

2002· article· en· W1966033174 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michihiro Nohara

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpreterNegotiationWork (physics)Political scienceBusinessEconomyEngineeringLawEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the end of the sixties, numerous Japanese contractors have been active in heavy industry work in Algeria and other North African countries. This has opened a large market for Japanese-French liaison interpreters. Such interpreters are hired by specialized agencies in Europe and Japan. With one or two exceptions, they are Japanese nationals. Most of them are young and have no previous experience as interpreters. Neither are they properly briefed before they are sent to the site, but they become proficient in their work with experience. Their tasks range from interpreting at various levels to translation and even participation in negotiations and report drafting. Material working conditions are comparatively good, but the duration of contracts is short and long-term stability of employment is uncertain. The precariousness of interpreting jobs and the temporary nature of the Japanese companies' contracting work in North Africa make this activity a provisional and highly volatile one. Japanese liaison interpreters in North Africa do not feel like professional interpreters and do not aspire to become professionals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeta Journal des traducteurs→Same topicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis→French-language works237,207→