ArticlePloS one2026
Textual overlap rather than domain alignment: A comparative study of fine-tuning strategies for specialised machine translation with large language models.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
General-purpose large language models (LLMs) may struggle in specialised machine translation, but the conditions under which fine-tuning improves translation performance remain unclear. This study compares full-parameter fine-tuning (FPFT) and parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) for Chinese-English political discourse translation using a purpose-built corpus and the Qwen3-14B model. Translation performance was assessed on three 50-item test sets using BLEU, ROUGE-L F1, METEOR, and BERTScore F1, together with BLEU pass-rate likelihood-ratio G2 tests, paired t-tests, and paired Cohen's dz for item-level score differences. The results reveal a clear contrast between unseen in-domain evaluation, maximum-overlap benchmarking, and semantically related but non-fine-tuned evaluation. On Test Set A and Test Set C, neither fine-tuning strategy produced a statistically significant BLEU pass-rate advantage over the base model, and paired tests across the continuous metrics did not show consistent fine-tuning gains. On Test Set B, which was sampled from the fine-tuning corpus, both fine-tuned models substantially outperformed the base model across all four metrics, with FPFT achieving the highest scores and PEFT providing a more computationally efficient alternative. These findings indicate that textual overlap between training and deployment data, rather than broad domain similarity alone, strongly conditions the observed benefit of fine-tuning. The study offers an empirically grounded framework for selecting fine-tuning strategies in specialised machine translation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.