MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022691110 · doi:10.3968/11613

The Reform of Cultivation Mode of Chinese University English Translation Talents in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

2020· article· en· W3022691110 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiang Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConnotationChinaCollege EnglishTranslation (biology)CurriculumMathematics educationQuality (philosophy)Mode (computer interface)Computer scienceEngineering managementArtificial intelligenceEngineering ethicsEngineeringSociologyPsychologyPolitical sciencePedagogyLinguisticsEpistemologyHuman–computer interactionPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advent of the era of artificial intelligence will make artificial intelligence steadily integrate into the cultivation mode for translation talents, greatly innovate the concepts and methods of translation teaching in college English in China, and continuously improve the quality of talent cultivation. The paper aims to analyze the connotation and main characteristics of artificial intelligence, and then probe into the current situation of English translation talents cultivation in Chinese universities. Finally, it puts forward the path of reform of the cultivation mode for translation talents from the aspects of the objectives of translation talent cultivation and curriculum system, teaching philosophy and teaching methods, teaching resources and teaching tools as well as the teaching evaluation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicEducational Technology and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207