MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037839371 · doi:10.7202/037686ar

Parliamentary Interpreting in Malaysia: A Case Study

2009· article· en· W2037839371 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Noraini Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentRemunerationInterpreterWork (physics)Public relationsAptitudeEthical codeCode (set theory)LegislaturePolitical sciencePedagogySociologyPsychologyLawEngineeringPoliticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article seeks to describe the current scenario of parliamentary interpreting in Malaysia by studying the interpreters’ work nature, aptitude and qualifications as well as remuneration and promotional opportunity. It also highlights the important aspects of the profession such as job mystification, training and continuing education, the connection between the training centres and the professional environment, the need to educate the public through the establishment of professional associations, and the implementation of an ethics code as well as the sense of professionalism among the interpreters. The author also proposes ways to improve the situation which would contribute to the professionalisation of interpreting in the Malaysian Parliament particularly and in Malaysia in general.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeta Journal des traducteursSame topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207