MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409603738 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-181

A Study of Knowledge Transfer in English Translation Teaching Based on Deep Learning

2025· article· en· W4409603738 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslation (biology)Computer scienceTransfer of learningKnowledge transferMathematics educationNatural language processingArtificial intelligencePsychologyKnowledge managementChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study firstly introduces the working principle of deep learning-based neural machine translation model (NMT) and its recurrent neural network translation backbone network, which enhances the semantic characterization capability through Glove word embedding layer.A tree-to-sequence based attention mechanism is innovatively introduced at the encoder side, and a tree-based encoder is appended to the traditional sequence encoder to construct syntax-aware context vectors.On the decoder side, the syntactic tree structure information is integrated into the sequence-to-sequence model (seq2seq), and this model is used to explore the knowledge transfer effect of the English translation teaching process.The results show that the accuracy rates of the neural machine English translation models incorporating syntactic information proposed in this paper are all above 90%.The experiment on the effect of English translation teaching shows that the mean values of students' scores on the post-test of long sentence translation and composition translation in the reading section of the experimental class increased by 11.022 and 12.5388 points respectively compared with those of the control class, with significant differences between the scores of the two groups of students (p<0.05), and the same significant differences are presented between the scores on the pre-test and post-test of the students' scores on the long sentence translation and composition translation in the experimental class.It can be seen that the application of the model can effectively promote knowledge transfer and help students better understand and utilize translation skills.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.284 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicEducational Technology and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207