Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42639055›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026

Faithful or evasive? An empirical study on translation norm preferences of Chinese and American LLMs in Chinese official political and policy discourse.

Xinyu Zhu, Yu Yin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Xinyu ZhuSchool of Foreign Languages, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.
Yu YinSchool of Foreign Languages, Southeast University, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Large language models now handle a share of cross-lingual political translation, but no study has directly measured whether they follow stable normative preferences when doing so. Methods: We target Chinese-to-English translation of Chinese political and policy terms embedded in authentic official discourse. Mapping 52 publications across translation theory, LLM empirics, and AI alignment yields a five-dimensional Translation Norm Orientations (TNO) framework: Faithfulness (FN), Fluency (FLN), Cultural Adaptation (CAN), Ethical Hedging (EHN), and Foreignization Retention (FRN). Eight mainstream Chinese and American LLMs complete a Forced-Choice Translation Ranking Task (FCTRT) on 20 ideologically sensitive political terms, ranked across three repeated trials. Kendall's W assesses ranking stability, Mann-Whitney U tests with BH-FDR correction test between-group differences, and hierarchical clustering identifies latent normative prototypes. Results: All eight models rank FN first; CAN, EHN, and FRN settle into a shared low-priority band beneath it. None of the five dimensions shows a statistically significant CN-US split. FN alone carries a medium effect size (Cliff's Discussion: These results tie translation norm theory to AI evaluation and supply a benchmark other researchers can reuse to examine LLM-mediated political communication.

Indexed as

Chinese official political and policy discoursecross-cultural comparisonforced-choice translation ranking tasklarge language modelstranslation norm orientations

Identifiers

PMID42639055
PMCPMC13500578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.