MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2274640598 · doi:10.17979/rlex.2013.19.0.3980

Lexicografía electrónica y traducción: propuesta de un modelo de adquisición de estrategias

2018· article· es· W2274640598 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. Ángeles Ramos

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Lexicografía · 2018
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitat Jaume IUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Las fuentes de consulta electrónicas forman parte del proceso de documentación de todo traductor, y no hay duda de que un uso eficaz de las mismas es imprescindible para realizar con éxito el proceso de trasvase. El presente artículo pretende contribuir a la llamada lexicografía pedagógica. A tal fin, se propone un modelo de adquisición de estrategias de consulta de los diccionarios electrónicos que, a nuestro parecer, puede llegar a aumentar y mejorar tanto la competencia léxica de los estudiantes como las destrezas de búsqueda en los diccionarios electrónicos.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0200.029
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de LexicografíaSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207