MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994001882 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v4n5p35

Reading and Translation: Suggestions for Integration

2014· article· en· W1994001882 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Musallam Al-Ma’ani, Amel Salman, Nafla S. Kharusi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorryCompetence (human resources)Computer scienceReading (process)Translation (biology)Mathematics educationTarget textLinguisticsPsychologyNatural language processingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Students entering undergraduate translation programs tend to rely on their instructors’ general knowledge, andindeed on information of whatever kind that can be gleaned from this source. At this stage, they still lack real worldknowledge and often language competence too. Hence, instructors worry about what they should include in theirintroductory courses for such students. The present study tries to determine whether a learner-centered approachto the problem, in which reading parallel texts and exposing beginners to information on a topic, its vocabularyand structure, helps with understanding a source text and producing its target equivalent.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207