Gonna repost a few plamo testing results from /vg/vn/ because why not. >>>/vg/586956432 I gave it the first 100 lines of CARNIVAL, which I'd already translated with Opus 5.5, so I compared the results: >The current translation is by Claude Opus 5.5 (claude-opus-5-5), and the local one is by PLaMo 3 Translate 8B (Q4_K_M, run with llama.cpp). On accuracy, PLaMo holds up better than expected for a quantized 8B model. About 92% of lines keep the source meaning, it adds nothing, and it doesn’t soften the content. Its roughly six errors follow a pattern: almost all come from colloquial or idiomatic Japanese, not from difficult grammar. It reads 開かねえ (written あかねえ) as “dark” instead of “won’t open” and ギラギラした目つき as “bloodshot”, it turns a spiked collar (イガイガ) into a “scratchy” one, and it gets two subject or object relations wrong: who gets scolded, and whom the officer should calm. Opus made none of these mistakes. In this game, the PLaMo errors would show up in casual narration and dialogue, which is most of the script. >The bigger weakness is voice. The narrator is casual, rambling and self-mocking, and that tone is a large part of the text’s appeal. PLaMo turns it into formal prose (“Moreover”, “utterly repulsive”, “stimulating that innate trait of mine”). It mixes tenses within a single line, and it translates repeated catchphrases like やれない differently each time, so the running jokes stop working. In practice, almost every PLaMo line in this section would need light editing to sound like the character. A reviewer would spend more time fixing tone than fixing meaning. On the plus side, its literal phrasing is sometimes cleaner than Opus’s (“darkness clings to every shadowy corner”), and short dialogue lines come out nearly identical.

⬆ upvote 0