MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140566821 · doi:10.7202/004620ar

MT Project at University of Innsbruck

2002· article· fr· W2140566821 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. J. Wormwood

Bibliographic record

VenueMeta Journal des traducteurs · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce compte rendu s'inscrit dans le cadre d'un projet de recherche ayant pour objectif une comparaison entre traduction automatique et traduction humaine. Un exemple de traduction (allemand-anglais) effectuée par un programme interactif est examiné et comparé à la traduction faite par des étudiants-traducteurs. Le texte choisi, un texte technico-commercial relativement simple, est d'un type réputé apte à la traduction automatique. Les difficultés les plus fréquentes rencontrées par la traduction automatique aux différents niveaux linguistiques sont commentées, et les aspects essentiels d'une traduction dont le traducteur humain peut tenir compte mais non la machine évoqués.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2410.159

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeta Journal des traducteursSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207