MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409602165 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-044

A Language Model-based Approach to Context Analysis in Business English Translation

2025· article· en· W4409602165 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslation (biology)Computer scienceLinguisticsContext (archaeology)Business EnglishNatural language processingHistoryPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we use a large language model for business English translation and context analysis, and propose an adaptive parameter unfreezing method based on the quantization difference between adjacent layers within the decoder to fine-tune the layers of the language model related to the translation task, and to understand the behavior of the model in the relevant layers.Then the method of combining different encoders is proposed as a dual encoding-decoding framework on top of the traditional encoding-decoding framework, which is applied to the task of context analysis in business English translation.The fine-tuning method in this paper significantly improves the text translation quality of the language model, especially in the English-X tri-lingualization, which improves the COMET and BLEU metrics by 3.22 and 2.58 points respectively.In addition, the dual encodingdecoding model proposed in this paper is applicable to the task of contextual analysis in business English translation, which significantly improves the performance of contextual analysis in business English, and the F1 value on the HIT-CDTB dataset is improved by 11.60% compared with that of Rutherford's model.The experiment proves that the proposed method of text has made progress in the research of the task of analyzing textual contextual relations in business English.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.900

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207