Swan and ArabicMTEB: Dialect-Aware, Arabic-Centric, Cross-Lingual, and Cross-Cultural Embedding Models and Benchmarks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we introduce Swan, a family of embedding models centred around the Arabic language, addressing both small-scale and large-scale use cases. Swan includes two variants: Swan-Small, based on ARBERTv2, and Swan-Large, built on ArMistral, a pretrained Arabic large language model. To evaluate these models, we propose ArabicMTEB, a comprehensive benchmark suite that assesses cross-lingual, multi-dialectal, multi-domain, and multi-cultural Arabic text embedding performance, covering eight diverse tasks and spanning 94 datasets. Swan-Large achieves state-of-the-art results, outperforming Multilingual-E5-large in most Arabic tasks, while the Swan-Small consistently surpasses Multilingual-E5-base. Our extensive evaluations demonstrate that Swan models are dialectally and culturally aware, excelling across various Arabic domains while offering significant monetary efficiency. This work significantly advances the field of Arabic language modelling and provides valuable resources for future research and applications in Arabic natural language processing. Our models and benchmarks will be made publicly accessible for research.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".