MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379514227 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-28819-7_40

Deep Dive Machine Translation

2023· book-chapter· en· W4379514227 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Inguna Skadiņa, Andrejs Vasiļjevs, Mārcis Pinnis, Aivars Bērziņš, Nora Aranberri, Joachim Van den Bogaert, Sally O’Connor, Mercedes García-Martínez, Iakes Goenaga, Jan Hajič, Manuel García–Herranz, Christian Lieske, Martin Popel, Maja Popović, Sheila Castilho, Federico Gaspari, Rudolf Rosa, Riccardo Superbo, Andy Way

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive technologies · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeEuropean CommissionInstitute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction
KeywordsMachine translationComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Field (mathematics)State (computer science)Data sciencePoint (geometry)Knowledge managementPolitical scienceArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Machine Translation (MT) is one of the oldest language technologies having been researched for more than 70 years. However, it is only during the last decade that it has been widely accepted by the general public, to the point where in many cases it has become an indispensable tool for the global community, supporting communication between nations and lowering language barriers. Still, there remain major gaps in the technology that need addressing before it can be successfully a0146pplied in under-resourced settings, can understand context and use world knowledge. This chapter provides an overview of the current state-of-the-art in the field of MT, offers technical and scientific forecasting for 2030, and provides recommendations for the advancement of MT as a critical technology if the goal of digital language equality in Europe is to be achieved.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.721
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCognitive technologiesSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207