MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136832605 · doi:10.7202/013265ar

Révision : Définitions et paramètres

2006· article· fr· W2136832605 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hyang Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Notre étude a eu pour objectif de réfléchir sur un sujet longtemps négligé par les traductologues malgré son importance primordiale dans tout processus de traduction, à savoir la révision. Dans cet article, il sera d’abord question de la concrétisation du concept. Il s’agira ensuite d’une réflexion sur les diverses définitions du mot qu’ont proposées plusieurs auteurs ainsi que sur les limites montrées par ces derniers quant à apporter une définition claire qui permettrait d’éviter l’écueil d’une confusion terminologique. Finalement, l’objectivité en matière de révision sera abordée, par le biais d’un examen des paramètres proposés par trois auteurs et en vue d’en produire une synthèse pour, en fait, parvenir à un total de quatre paramètres.

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), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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