Estructuración de la interpretación en los servicios públicos: el modelo de banco de intérpretes como una respuesta organizada a las necesidades de comunicación
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globalisation urges governments to address equality in access to public services. Even though Public Service Interpreting (PSI) helps allophones to overcome the breach in communication, such services need a solid, organised structure to effectively respond to the current linguistic needs. This article presents the results of a comparative study of the healthcare interpreting services provided in Barcelona and Montreal which, by applying an indirect method of observation (interviews) to examine the aforementioned services, describes the existing PSI structures and organisations as narrated by their managers. Our conclusions draw attention to certain aspects of Barcelona’s interpreting services which, should they be modified, could be beneficial. Finally, the interpreters bank model settled in Montreal (and throughout Quebec) is suggested as a role model for Barcelona, that could contribute to structuring PSI services in Europe.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it