Query-Based Retrieval Using Universal Sentence Encoder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Natural language processing, various tasks can be implemented with the features provided by word embeddings. But for obtaining embeddings for larger chunks like sentences, the efforts applied through word embeddings will not be sufficient. To resolve such issues sentence embeddings can be used. In sentence embeddings, complete sentences along with their semantic information are represented as vectors so that the machine finds it easy to understand the context. In this paper, we propose a Question Answering System (QAS) based on sentence embeddings. Our goal is to obtain the text from the provided context for a user-query by extracting the sentence in which the correct answer is present. Traditionally, infersent models have been used on SQUAD for building QAS. In recent times, Universal Sentence Encoder with USECNN and USETrans have been developed. In this paper, we have used another variant of the Universal sentence encoder, i.e. Deep averaging network in order to obtain pre-trained sentence embeddings. The results on the SQUAD-2.0 dataset indicate our approach (USE with DAN) performs well compared to Facebook’s infersent embedding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".