MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409603779 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-219

Exploration of Language Translation Problems under the Background of Artificial Intelligence Technology

2025· article· en· W4409603779 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslation (biology)Computer scienceMachine translationArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingLinguisticsPhilosophyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the deepening of globalized cooperation among countries around the world, the human society's demand for machine translation has increased rapidly, and the advancement of artificial intelligence technology has also put forward new requirements for the quality of machine translation.In this paper, we propose a neural machine translation model with adversarial training algorithm, using the Transformer model as the baseline model, by incorporating prior knowledge in order to strengthen the correlation between the intermediate hidden layers.In addition, besides introducing lexical knowledge into the neural machine translation approach, a neural machine translation model PhraseNet with phrase memory capable of storing bilingual phrases in the form of symbols is also incorporated.Finally, the effectiveness of the language translation model is tested using the NIST corpus.The results show that compared with the baseline model, the BLEU values of this paper's method in the NIST 2010, 2012, and 2016 test sets are improved by 1.81, 2.63, and 2.48, respectively, which significantly outperforms the baseline translation system.It shows that the method is able to bring a large improvement for both language translation accuracy and training execution cycle.Meanwhile, it also has a good guiding significance for the research and development of language translation in the context of the whole artificial intelligence technology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 topicMedical Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207