<scp>Binder:</scp> Hierarchical Concept Representation through Order Embedding of Binary Vectors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For natural language understanding and generation, embedding concepts using an order-based representation is an essential task. Unlike traditional point vector based representation, an order-based representation imposes geometric constraints on the representation vectors for explicitly capturing various semantic relationships that may exist between a pair of concepts. In existing literature, several approaches on order-based embedding have been proposed, mostly focusing on capturing hierarchical relationships; examples include vectors in Euclidean space, complex, Hyperbolic, order, and Box Embedding. Box embedding creates region-based rich representation of concepts, but along the process it sacrifices simplicity, requiring a custom-made optimization scheme for learning the representation. Hyperbolic embedding improves embedding quality by exploiting the ever-expanding property of Hyperbolic space, but it also suffers from the same fate as box embedding as gradient descent like optimization is not simple in the Hyperbolic space. In this work, we propose Binder, a novel approach for order-based representation. Binder uses binary vectors for embedding, so the embedding vectors are compact with an order of magnitude smaller footprint than other methods. Binder uses a simple and efficient optimization scheme for learning representation vectors with a linear time complexity. Our comprehensive experimental results show that Binder is very accurate, yielding competitive results on the representation task. But Binder stands out from its competitors on the transitive closure link prediction task as it can learn concept embeddings just from the direct edges, whereas all existing order-based approaches rely on the indirect edges. In particular, Binder achieves a whopping 70% higher F1-score than the second best method (98.6% vs 29%) in our largest dataset, WordNet Nouns (743,241 edges), when using only direct edges during training.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".