“Creative Shifts” as a Means of Measuring and Promoting Translational Creativity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thanks to Paul Kußmaul, the investigation of translational creativity has made considerable progress. The measurement of creativity, however, has remained a great challenge. The following article presents the results of the measurement of one aspect considered central to the notion of translational creativity, namely the measurement of the ability to depart from the source text (ST) structure by applying creative shifts , i.e., abstracting, modifying or concretising source text ideas in the target text (TT). Sixteen units of analysis from 4 experimental texts translated by 11 students of translation and 5 professional translators each were analysed with the aim of finding out how many of them constituted creative shifts as opposed to mere reproductions of the source text. The results of this sample analysis reveal that there are clear differences between student and professional behaviour and that a certain trend for the development of creative competence can be established. Moreover, these results do not only point to a methodologically interesting approach for analysing complex cognitive constructs, but they also provide a valuable starting point for pedagogic research and application.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it