Quantum Translation: A New Heuristic for Cognitive Uncertainty in the AI Era
Keywords:
heuristic decision-making; LLM-assisted translation; quantum-like cognition; translator cognition; uncertaintyAbstract
This study reframes uncertainty in translator cognition by proposing a Quantum Translation (QT)
heuristic superposition, collapse, and entanglement as a probabilistic lexicon for process analysis. Using
a PRISMA-consistent systematic literature review, we screened records from Scopus, Crossref, and
Google Scholar (2020–2025) via database queries and citation chasing, yielding 22 empirical studies.
Data extraction targeted instruments used in primary studies (e.g., eye tracking, key logging, screen
capture) and findings were synthesized thematically. Across the corpus, uncertainty is acknowledged as
central yet treated implicitly as ambiguity, difficulty, or risk. Product-focused evaluation routinely
obscures process-level signals such as cognitive load, recursive drafting, and attentional control. QT
addresses this gap by modeling (i) superposition as coexisting candidate renderings, (ii) collapse as
context-triggered resolution constrained by skopos, register, and pragmatics, and (iii) entanglement as
cross-level dependencies linking lexical, syntactic, and discourse decisions. The review also charts
convergences between human process traces and computational predictors (e.g., surprisal), informing
risk-aware human AI workflows. We contribute a testable heuristic and implications: integrate QT-
informed diagnostics in translator education; report AI use transparently; and adopt evaluation models
that combine process and product. Together, these steps strengthen accountability and professional preparedness for human AI collaboration.
Downloads
References
[1] Z. Zu, “The Right Contextual Information Determining the Success of Communication on
Translation,” Appl. Transl., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 12–16, 2021, doi:
10.51708/apptrans.v15n1.1423.
[2] Y. Cui and B. Zhen, “English-Chinese Translation: an Eye-Tracking, Screen-Recording and
Retrospective Study,” Perspect. Stud. Transl. Theory Pract., vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 740–760,
2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2020.1760899.
[3] B. Vanroy, M. Schaeffer, and L. Macken, “Comparing the Effect of Product-Based Metrics
on the Translation Process,” Front. Psychol., vol. 12, no. August, pp. 1–16, 2021, doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.681945.
[4] H. Mei and H. Chen, “Assessing Students’ Translation Competence: Integrating China’s
Standards of English With Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment Approaches,” Front. Psychol.,
vol. 13, no. March, pp. 1–13, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.872025.
[5] J. Zhang and S. Doherty, “Investigating Novice Translation Students’ AI Literacy in
Translation Education,” Interpret. Transl. Train., vol. 19, no. 3–4, pp. 234–253, 2025, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1080/1750399X.2025.2541478.
[6] Z. W. Lim, E. Vylomova, C. Kemp, and T. Cohn, “Predicting Human Translation Difficulty
with Neural Machine Translation,” Trans. Assoc. Comput. Linguist., vol. 12, pp. 1479–1496,
2024, doi: 10.1162/tacl_a_00714.
[7] J. Luo, C. Cherry, and G. Foster, “To Diverge or Not to Diverge: A Morphosyntactic
Perspective on Machine Translation vs Human Translation,” Trans. Assoc. Comput.
Linguist., vol. 12, pp. 355–371, 2024, doi: 10.1162/tacl_a_00645.
[8] Z. He et al., “Exploring Human-Like Translation Strategy with Large Language Models,”
Trans. Assoc. Comput. Linguist., vol. 12, pp. 229–246, 2024, doi: 10.1162/tacl_a_00642.
[9] Y. Cui and B. Zheng, “Extralinguistic Consultation in English–Chinese Translation: A Study
Drawing on Eye-Tracking and Screen-Recording Data,” Front. Psychol., vol. 13, pp. 1–15,
2022, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.891997.
[10] B. Whyatt, E. Tomczak-Łukaszewska, O. Witczak, and O. Lehka-Paul, “Readers Have to
Work Harder to Understand a Badly Translated Text: an Eye-Tracking Study into the Effects
of Translation Errors,” Perspect. Stud. Transl. Theory Pract., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 1085–1105,
2024, doi: 10.1080/0907676X.2024.2418016.
[11] B. Whyatt, O. Witczak, E. Tomczak-Łukaszewska, and O. Lehka-Paul, “The Proof of the
Translation Process is in the Reading of the Target text: An Eyetracking Reception Study,”
Ampersand, vol. 11, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2023.100149.
[12] N. J. Smith and R. Levy, “The effect of word predictability on reading time is logarithmic,”
Cognition, vol. 128, no. 3, pp. 302–319, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.02.013.
[13] S. O’Brien and M. Ehrensberger-Dow, “MT literacy—A Cognitive View,” Transl. Cogn.
Behav., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 145–164, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/tcb.00038.obr.
[14] L. Nunes Vieira and E. Alonso, “Translating Perceptions and Managing Expectations: an
Analysis of Management and Production Perspectives on Machine Translation,” Perspect.
Stud. Transl. Theory Pract., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 163–184, 2020, doi:
10.1080/0907676X.2019.1646776.
[15] Y. Wang and A. J. Daghigh, “Cognitive Effort in Human Translation and Machine Translation
Post-Editing Processes A Holistic and Phased View,” FORUM. Rev. Int. d’interprétation
traduction/International J. Interpret. Transl., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 139–162, 2023, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.22009.wan.
[16] Y. Wang and A. J. Daghigh, “Effect of Text Type on Translation Effort in Human Translation
and Neural Machine Translation Post-Editing Processes: Evidence from Eye-Tracking and
Keyboard-Logging,” Perspect. Stud. Transl. Theory Pract., vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 961–976, 2024,
doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0907676X.2023.2219850.
[17] Y. Wang, S. Li, and Y. Z. Rasmussen, “Translators’ Allocation of Cognitive Resources in Two
Translation Directions: A Study Using Eye-Tracking and Keystroke Logging,” Appl. Sci., vol.
15, no. 8, pp. 1–21, 2025, doi: 10.3390/app15084401.
[18] X. Li, Z. Gao, and H. Liao, “The Effect of Critical Thinking on Translation Technology
Competence among College Students: the Chain Mediating Role of Academic Self-Efficacy
and Cultural Intelligence,” Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag., vol. 16, no. April, pp. 1233–1256,
2023, doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S408477.
