MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000627474 · doi:10.7202/019854ar

Prospects of Machine Translation in the Chinese Context

2009· article· en· W2000627474 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Duoxiu Qian

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainland ChinaContext (archaeology)SketchChinaMachine translationFoundation (evidence)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China has been among the several leading countries in the research and applications of Machine Translation (MT) and Machine-aided Translation (MAT) ever since the 1950s. The first part of this paper is a historical sketch of MT and MAT in the Chinese context, highlighting some important stages in its development which have laid the foundation for later achievements. It is shown that the research of MT in this region is similar to that in other parts of the world, with the attention gradually turning to MAT. The second part deals with the state of the art of MT and MAT research and applications in Mainland China, Taiwan and Hong Kong, respectively. Then popular commercial software dedicated to the translation from Chinese into other foreign languages, and vice versa, are introduced, with an appraisal of both their merits and demerits. Finally, prospects of MT and MAT in the Chinese context is discussed. It is suggested that, for mutual benefits, MT and MAT research in the Chinese context should cooperate with the outside world more closely.

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)0.003
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeta Journal des traducteursSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207