Foto fija de la interpretación simultánea remota al inicio del 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEl presente articulo analiza el mayor cambio de paradigma en la interpretacion profesional de conferencias desde Nuremberg: la disrupcion que comporta la interpretacion simultanea remota (ISR). Inicialmente, se consideran las directrices pertinentes publicadas por la Asociacion Internacional de Interpretes de Conferencia (AIIC) este ano; junto con el informe publicado por el SCIC de la Union Europea tambien este ano, con los resultados de la evaluacion de cuatro plataformas de interpretacion remota. Posteriormente, solicitamos a nuestro equivalente espanol de AIIC, la Asociacion Espanola de Interpretes de Conferencia (AICE), un informe sobre la ISR. Ademas, pedimos a dos miembros del comite CNT 174 de Servicios de Traduccion de la UNE, organismo de normalizacion espanol en la ISO, otro informe sobre lo acaecido en el proceso normalizador, el estado actual de la cuestion y la evolucion posterior a la reunion de la ISO en Canada sobre ISR este verano. Finalmente, ampliamos la informacion suministrando un cuestionario sobre la ISR al resto de actores implicados en el proceso, es decir, los representantes de: empresas organizadoras de congresos y empleadoras de interpretes, empresas proveedoras de servicios de interpretacion remota, hubs de interpretacion remota, y proveedores de equipos de interpretacion y sonido. catalaAquest article analitza el major canvi de paradigma en la interpretacio professional de conferencies de de Nuremberg: la disrupcio que comporta la interpretacio simultania remota (ISR). Inicialment, es consideren les directrius pertinents publicades enguany per l'Associacio Internacional d'Interprets de Conferencia (AIIC) junt amb l'informe publicat per l'SCIC de la Unio Europea, tambe enguany, amb els resultats de l'avaluacio de quatre plataformes d'interpretacio remota. Posteriorment, sol·licitem al nostre equivalent espanyol d'AIIC, l'Associacio Espanyola d'Interprets de Conferencia (AICE), un informe sobre la ISR. Ames, demanem a dos membres del comite CNT 174 de Serveis de Traduccio de la UNE, organisme de Normalitzacio espanyols a la ISO,un altre informe sobre el proces normalitzador l'estat actual de la cuestio i l'evolucio posterior a la reunio de la ISO a Canada sobre ISR l'estiu de 2019. Finalment, ampliem la informaico aportant un questionari sobre la ISR a la resta d'acotrs implicats en el proces, es a dir, els representants d'empreses organitzadores de congressos i empleadores d'interpretes, empreses proveidores de serveis d'interpretacio remota, hubs d'interpretacio remota, i proveidors d'equips d'interpretacio i so. EnglishThis paper analyses the biggest paradigm shift in professional interpreting since Nuremberg: the disruption entailed by remote simultaneous interpreting (RSI). The guidelines published by the International Association of Conference Interpreters (AIIC) this year are initially considered, together with a report that was published by EU's SCIC also this year to disseminate the results of the assessment of four remote interpreting platforms. We also asked the Spanish equivalent of AIIC, the Spanish Association of Conference Interpreters (AICE), to provide us with a report on RSI. Likewise, we obtained another report from two members of the CNT 174 UNE (the Spanish standardization body at ISO) Committee on Translation Services, which describes the standardization process, its current state of the art and the development since the ISO meeting on RSI in Canada this summer. We finally completed the information by drafting a questionnaire on RSI that was supplied to the rest of the actors involved in the process, that is, professionals representing: companies that organize conferences and hire interpreters, remote interpreting service providers, remote interpreting hubs, as well as sound and interpreting equipment providers.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".