Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Report
Data sources: ZENODO
addClaim

Performance comparison of hybrid batch training with XLM-R and mT5 on MIRACL zero-shot retrieval

Authors: Assignee Research;

Performance comparison of hybrid batch training with XLM-R and mT5 on MIRACL zero-shot retrieval

Abstract

Information retrieval across different languages is an increasingly important challenge in natural language processing. Recent approaches based on multilingual pre-trained language models have achieved remarkable success, yet they often optimize for either monolingual, cross-lingual, or multilingual retrieval performance at the expense of others. This paper proposes a novel hybrid batch training strategy to simultaneously improve zero-shot retrieval performance across monolingual, cross-lingual, and multilingual settings while mitigating language bias. The approach fine-tunes multilingual langResearch goal: How does the performance of the hybrid batch training strategy compare to state-of-the-art multilingual language models like XLM-R or mT5 on the MIRACL benchmark when evaluated with zero-shot retrieval accuracy for both high-resource and low-resource language pairs?Autonomous synthesis report generated by Assignee Research. Tribunal consensus score: 8.3/10.

Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback