MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101566153

The Trouble with SMT Consistency

2012· article· en· W2101566153 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marine Carpuat, Michel Simard

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)Natural language processingTerminologyPhraseTranslation (biology)Context (archaeology)SentenceArtificial intelligenceMachine translationTextual entailmentInformation retrievalLinguisticsLogical consequence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SMT typically models translation at the sentence level, ignoring wider document context. Does this hurt the consistency of translated documents? Using a phrase-based SMT system in various data conditions, we show that SMT translates documents remarkably consistently, even without document knowledge. Nevertheless, translation inconsistencies often indicate translation errors. However, unlike in human translation, these errors are rarely due to terminology inconsistency. They are more often symptoms of deeper issues with SMT models instead. 1

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.253
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.253
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.010
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations44
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207