MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

English-to-Sundanese Translation using Neural Machine Translation: Collection and Analytics

2022· article· en· W4317642541 on OpenAlexaff
Mahardhika Pratama, Pamela Kareen, Ermatita Ermatita, Peng Yin Choo, Miroslav Kostecki, Desmond Devendran

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 International Conference on Informatics, Multimedia, Cyber and Information System (ICIMCIS) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsSydney Steel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMachine translationComputer scienceNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceEvaluation of machine translationTransformerExample-based machine translationGermanText corpusMachine translation software usabilitySpeech recognitionLinguisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural Machine Translation (NMT) performs sophisticated technology of translation between particular languages accurately and perfectly compared with traditional Statistical Machine Translation (SMT). Current models like Transformer and NMT can produce better translation results. In order to create NMT, we need a large-scale parallel corpus for training and validation of NMT data. Existing parallel corpus such as WMT English-German or WMT English-France become benchmark dataset or tasks in WMT. Conversely, ethnic language parallel corpus like English-to-Sundanese ethnic language is rarely used. This paper presents the collection and analysis of large-scale English-to-Sundanese parallel corpus. Our Parallel corpus encompasses various topics like sports, economics, politics and others. We produced a BLEU score English-to-Sundanese 38.91 that indicated our corpus valid.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 International Conference on Informatics, Multimedia, Cyber and Information System (ICIMCIS)→Same topicNatural Language Processing Techniques→French-language works237,207→