Integration of Statistical Models for Dictation of Document Translations in a Machine-Aided Human Translation Task
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a model for machine-aided human translation (MAHT) that integrates source language text and target language acoustic information to produce the text translation of source language document. It is evaluated on a scenario where a human translator dictates a first draft target language translation of a source language document. Information obtained from the source language document, including translation probabilities derived from statistical machine translation (SMT) and named entity tags derived from named entity recognition (NER), is incorporated with acoustic phonetic information obtained from an automatic speech recognition (ASR) system. One advantage of the system combination used here is that words that are not included in the ASR vocabulary can be correctly decoded by the combined system. The MAHT model and system implementation is presented. It is shown that a relative decrease in word error rate of 29% can be obtained by this combined system relative to the baseline ASR performance on a French to English document translation task in the Hansard domain. In addition, it is shown that transcriptions obtained by using the combined system show a relative increase in NIST score of 34% compared to transcriptions obtained from the baseline ASR system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".