Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les internationalismes de langues de spécialité, en particulier ceux d'origine gréco-latine, peuvent certes être une aide pour le traducteur technique; mais ce dernier se doit toutefois d'éviter les erreurs que peut entraîner l'utilisation irréfléchie de termes étrangers, ce que quelques exemples mettent en lumière. La suite de l'article, s'appuyant sur un modèle didactique concret, explique comment intégrer, dans le cadre d'un cursus pour traducteurs techniques, une introduction systématique aux formants internationaux. L'étude systématique des formants internationaux aide l'étudiant à comprendre des termes jusque-là inconnus tout en représentant un support important à la mémorisation des terminologies. En outre, la comparaison critique entre termes de différentes langues lui montre que l'identité de la forme ne permet pas de conclure sans réserve à l'identité du contenu.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".