Evolution of Machine Interpreting


2023-11-16 01:54 Nimdzi Insights


阅读模式 切换至中文

Article was written by Ewandro Magalhaes and Roman Civin Methodology From data collected on the interpreting systems featured in Nimdzi’s Language Technology Atlas, we have compiled a public version of the Nimdzi Evolution Matrix. We have supplemented the data with the cumulative knowledge and experience of our experts who work with a variety of interpreting products on a daily basis. Application The Nimdzi Machine Interpreting Matrix can be used to help developers and businesses assess the potential and promise of the main interpreting service providers on the market. For example, an investor could use the matrix to compare and contrast historical data and projections as they decide where to place their bets. Providers themselves could use this positioning to learn how mature and innovative the technology is as the basis for their M&A or divestiture decisions. Players, Dimensions and Labels The original Language Technology (LT) Landscape features over 150 different interpreting systems, broken down into four categories, with Machine Interpreting category being the most dynamic in this space. The matrix aims to give some order to this wild competition going on in that segment by sorting the racers according to the dimensions and labels identified below. In the first version of our momentum grid, we have narrowed it down to six (6) top contenders. The selection criteria centered on vendors whose solutions aim at providing interpretation for meetings or conferences that would otherwise require human interpreters. We left out solutions geared at helping users through short and quick daily interactions, like asking for directions, navigating urban centers, or finding care. The six vendors selected have been plotted on the map according to how solid they are (funding / revenue) and how fast they seem to be growing (client base growth) on the market as well as their ability to innovate and lead the space. Dimensions Client adoption, depicted horizontally, indicates the provider’s relative growth since entering the market. It is a fair indication of how popular and well-received their solution has been. The vertical axis reflects the financial availability of a provider to sustain growth. It is an indication of their endurance to go the distance in what is probably going to be a long game. Crossing these two dimensions results in a reliable indicator of a provider’s product maturity (as evidenced by the pace of client adoption) and their ability to fuel future growth by waiting for greater market maturity and player consolidation. It helps answer a few important questions: Is the provider’s lead based on the technical merit of its own solution? Or is their lead fueled by an inflow of investment that may or may not be sustainable overtime? Can those in the lower right quadrant (large client adoption, low funding) continue to grow organically, or are they obvious targets for acquisition by players with deeper pockets? Are those on the bottom left quadrant on their way out? Can an influx of funding get them back on track? Will those on the upper left be able to leverage their funds and grow by acquisition? Labels Depending on how they fare against each of the two dimensions above, contenders will fall into one of four quadrants. In labeling each quadrant, we looked for an analogy that would preserve the competitive nature currently seen in the environment. The labels also introduce an element of speed, which is key to identifying trends in what is currently a very change-prone configuration. The labels are as follows: Pacers (top center): Well-established and financially viable players with enough power to grow organically or wait competitors out. Sprinters (top right): Financially viable and fast-growing players, with a declared appetite to stay in the lead pack. Challengers (bottom right): Innovative and nimble players whose growth is fueled by the merits of their own product and their sales effort. Laggers (bottom center): Low funding and dwindling client base, probably on their way out. Bystanders (bottom left): Companies with low resources that have potential to skyrocket through innovation and become Pacers. Disclaimer: Scoring is somewhat subjective, and so are the cut-offs Financial availability is assessed through verifiable or estimated funding and revenue data available on the market or through consultations. While this scoring mechanism is not completely objective, and may be biased by industry perceptions, it provides a useful means of clustering. The separators between clusters were placed with simple sophistication to highlight key insights. However, these separators are not set in stone, and borderline cases could in fact go either way within a margin of uncertainty. Ask the experts The aspects that are most important for a particular technology buyer vary depending on the actual application. Talk to a Nimdzi expert to identify the specific needs of a VIT application in your organization. By carefully selecting the variables for its partners, Nimdzi creates custom assessments that result in a valuable tool for understanding the potential of the required language software. References VIT Feature explorer 2023 Nimdzi Interpreting Index Remote Simultaneous Interpreting: Which Platform Is Best For Me?
文章由Ewandro Magalhaes和Roman Civin撰写 方法论 根据Nimdzi语言技术地图集中口译系统收集的数据,我们编制了一个公开版本的Nimdzi进化矩阵。我们用每天使用各种口译产品的专家积累的知识和经验补充了数据。 应用 Nimdzi机器口译矩阵可用于帮助开发人员和企业评估市场上主要口译服务提供商的潜力和前景。例如,投资者可以使用矩阵来比较和对比历史数据和预测,以决定在哪里下注。提供商自己可以利用这种定位来了解技术的成熟和创新程度,作为他们M&A或剥离决策的基础。 播放器、尺寸和标签 原始语言技术(LT)领域拥有超过150个不同的口译系统,分为四个类别,其中机器口译类别是这个领域中最具活力的。矩阵旨在通过根据下面确定的尺寸和标签对参赛者进行排序,为这一细分市场中正在进行的激烈竞争提供一些秩序。 在我们动量网格的第一个版本中,我们已经将范围缩小到六(6)个顶级竞争者。选择标准以供应商为中心,这些供应商的解决方案旨在为需要人工口译员的会议或大会提供口译服务。我们忽略了旨在帮助用户进行简短快速的日常交互的解决方案,如问路、导航城市中心或寻找护理。 根据他们的稳固程度(资金/收入)和他们在市场上的增长速度(客户群增长)以及他们在该领域的创新和领导能力,在地图上绘制了所选的六家供应商。 尺寸 横向描述的客户采用率表明了提供商自进入市场以来的相对增长。这很好地表明了他们的解决方案有多受欢迎和欢迎。 纵轴反映了提供商维持增长的财务可用性。这表明了他们在这场可能会是一场漫长的比赛中坚持到底的耐力。 跨越这两个维度会产生一个可靠的指标,表明提供商的产品成熟度(由客户采用的速度证明)以及他们通过等待更大的市场成熟度和参与者整合来推动未来增长的能力。它有助于回答几个重要问题: 提供商的领先优势是否基于其自身解决方案的技术优势?或者,他们的领先地位是由投资流入推动的,随着时间的推移,投资流入可能是可持续的,也可能是不可持续的? 那些在右下象限(大客户采用,低资金)的公司能继续有机增长吗,或者他们是财力更雄厚的公司收购的明显目标? 那些在左下角象限的人要出去了吗?资金的涌入能让他们重回正轨吗? 左上角的人能够利用他们的资金,通过收购实现增长吗? 标签 根据他们在上述两个维度中的表现,竞争者将进入四个象限中的一个。在标记每个象限时,我们寻找一个类比来保持目前在环境中看到的竞争性质。标签还引入了速度元素,这是识别当前非常容易发生变化的配置趋势的关键。标签如下: 步行者队(顶级中锋):成熟且经济上可行的球员,有足够的力量有机增长或等待竞争对手出局。 短跑运动员(右上):经济上可行且快速增长的运动员,公开表示希望保持领先地位。 挑战者(右下):创新和灵活的玩家,他们的成长是由自己产品的优点和销售努力推动的。 落后者(底部中间):低资金和不断减少的客户群,可能正在被淘汰。 旁观者(左下):资源不足、有潜力通过创新一飞冲天、成为步行者的公司。 免责声明:评分有些主观,分数线也是如此 通过市场上可获得的可核实或估计的资金和收入数据或通过咨询来评估资金可用性。 虽然这种评分机制并不完全客观,而且可能会受到行业看法的影响,但它提供了一种有用的聚类方法。集群之间的分隔符以简单复杂的方式放置,以突出关键的见解。然而,这些分隔符并不是一成不变的,事实上,在不确定的范围内,边缘情况可能会向任何一方发展。 请教专家 对于特定的技术购买者来说,最重要的方面因实际应用而异。与Nimdzi专家交流,确定您组织中VIT应用程序的具体需求。通过为其合作伙伴仔细选择变量,Nimdzi创建了定制评估,为理解所需语言软件的潜力提供了一个有价值的工具。 参考文献 VIT功能资源管理器 2023年Nimdzi解读指数 远程同声传译:哪个平台最适合我?