MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043243894 · doi:10.7202/017692ar

Managing Trust: Translating and the Network Economy

2008· article· en· W2043243894 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kristiina Abdallah, Kaisa Koskinen

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial capitalLoyaltyField (mathematics)SociologyOrder (exchange)Focus (optics)Knowledge managementCapital (architecture)Empirical researchPublic relationsEpistemologySocial scienceComputer sciencePolitical scienceBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to understand recent developments in the field of professional translation, we focus in this article on the contemporary network-based translation industry using Albert-Lázsló Barabási’s model of real-world networks and combining it with sociological studies of social capital and trust. According to Barabási, networks are scale-free and therefore fundamentally undemocratic. Barabási’s findings can be used not only by researchers in explaining the topology and organizing principles of production networks but also by professional translators as a conceptual tool in making sense of their current working environment. We use empirical evidence from interviews with six Finnish translators, relating what we discover to be the roles of trust, loyalty, and social capital in networks. The findings suggest that (a lack of) trust may be the Achilles’ heel of these economic networks.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0110.018
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations117
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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