Demonstrates effective multilingual incident text normalization in air-gapped IT environments, suggesting a robust framework for data privacy.
Information technology service management (ITSM) systems generate large volumes of unstructured incident descriptions. They frequently include multilingual content, code-switching, informal language, and domain-specific terminology. These characteristics make automated text processing substantially more complicated and limit the applicability of conventional machine translation solutions, particularly in environments subject to strict data privacy and air-gap constraints. This paper presents a system-level reproducibility study of a deterministic two-stage cascaded neural machine translation (NMT) pipeline for normalizing multilingual IT incident text in resource-constrained, air-gapped environments. The study evaluates a sequential RU→EN and LT→EN translation strategy specifically selected to bypass unreliable language identification, enabling stable processing of code-switched incident descriptions. A system-level processing pipeline, which includes text normalization, segmentation, deduplication, adaptive batching, and language-aware data flow optimization, is analyzed to assess its impact on reducing redundant inference operations. The methodology is evaluated on a real-world ITSM dataset comprising 84,285 incident records. An incremental experimental design is used to isolate the specific contributions of computational and data-flow optimizations. Translation quality is assessed using BLEU and COMET metrics against expert reference translations produced via a primary translation and subsequent cross-verification by a second domain expert to ensure linguistic and technical consistency. The results indicate that a cascaded NMT architecture combined with systematic data-flow optimization provides a reproducible and privacy-preserving framework for multilingual IT incident text normalization, effectively supporting downstream analytical tasks in constrained operational ITSM environments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jevsejev et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: