Translation-based Supervision for Policy Generation in Simultaneous Neural Machine Translation
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
In simultaneous machine translation, finding an agent with the optimal action sequence of reads and writes that maintain a high level of translation quality while minimizing the average lag in producing target tokens remains an extremely challenging problem. We propose a novel supervised learning approach for training an agent that can detect the minimum number of reads required for generating each target token by comparing simultaneous translations against full-sentence translations during training to generate oracle action sequences. These oracle sequences can then be used to train a supervised model for action generation at inference time. Our approach provides an alternative to current heuristic methods in simultaneous translation by introducing a new training objective, which is easier to train than previous attempts at training the agent using reinforcement learning techniques for this task. Our experimental results show that our novel training method for action generation produces much higher quality translations while minimizing the average lag in simultaneous translation.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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