MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101305659 · doi:10.7202/011002ar

Translator’s Frequent Lexis Store and Dictionary Use as Factors in SLT Comprehension and Translation Speed – A Comparative Study of Professional, Paraprofessional and Novice Translators

2005· article· en· W2101305659 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eddie Ronowicz, Joanna Hehir, Toshihiro Kaimi, Keiko Kojima, Deok-Shin Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLexisThink aloud protocolComprehensionRead aloudProtocol (science)Computer sciencePsychologyLinguisticsMedicineHuman–computer interactionAlternative medicineUsability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines empirical evidence on the use of translational aids from TAP studies over the last two decades and describes a think aloud protocol (TAP) study designed to verify some of these claims. Following a description of methodology used, the results of the study are presented and discussed. Basing on experience gained from the study, a number of methodological issues are then discussed: the use of students as subjects in TAP studies, the use of postgraduate students as co-investigators, as well as advantages and shortcomings of TAP methodology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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