SOTAVerified

Semantic Textual Similarity

Semantic textual similarity deals with determining how similar two pieces of texts are. This can take the form of assigning a score from 1 to 5. Related tasks are paraphrase or duplicate identification.

Image source: Learning Semantic Textual Similarity from Conversations

Papers

Recently AddedMost HypedMost ActiveNeeds VerificationMost Verified

Showing 1376–1400 of 2381 papers

TitleStatusHype
Weakly Supervised Multiclass Video Segmentation—0
Weakly-Supervised Video Moment Retrieval via Semantic Completion Network—0
Web-based Semantic Similarity for Emotion Recognition in Web Objects—0
Weighted Sampling for Masked Language Modeling—0
Weight Initialization in Neural Language Models—0
Weiwei: A Simple Unsupervised Latent Semantics based Approach for Sentence Similarity—0
What Analogies Reveal about Word Vectors and their Compositionality—0
What does this Emoji Mean? A Vector Space Skip-Gram Model for Twitter Emojis—0
What implementation and translation teach us: the case of semantic similarity measures in wordnets—0
What Makes Better Augmentation Strategies? Augment Difficult but Not too Different—0
What metaphor identification systems can tell us about metaphor-in-language—0
What Would Elsa Do? Freezing Layers During Transformer Fine-Tuning—0
Wild Devs' at SemEval-2017 Task 2: Using Neural Networks to Discover Word Similarity—0
WOLVESAAR at SemEval-2016 Task 1: Replicating the Success of Monolingual Word Alignment and Neural Embeddings for Semantic Textual Similarity—0
Wolves at SemEval-2018 Task 10: Semantic Discrimination based on Knowledge and Association—0
Word Embedding Evaluation in Downstream Tasks and Semantic Analogies—0
Word Embeddings and Validity Indexes in Fuzzy Clustering—0
Word Embeddings as Metric Recovery in Semantic Spaces—0
Word Embeddings based on Fixed-Size Ordinally Forgetting Encoding—0
Word net based Method for Determining Semantic Sentence Similarity through various Word Senses—0
Words Blending Boxes. Obfuscating Queries in Information Retrieval using Differential Privacy—0
Word Semantic Similarity for Morphologically Rich Languages—0
Word Sense Filtering Improves Embedding-Based Lexical Substitution—0
Word Sense Induction Using Lexical Chain based Hypergraph Model—0
Word Similarity Datasets for Indian Languages: Annotation and Baseline Systems—0
Show:102550
← PrevPage 56 of 96Next →
All datasetsSTS BenchmarkMTEBMRPCSICKSTS13STS14STS12STS15STS16MRPC DevSentEvalSICK-R

Benchmark Results

#ModelMetricClaimedVerifiedStatus
1SMARTRoBERTaDev Pearson Correlation92.8—Unverified
2DeBERTa (large)Accuracy92.5—Unverified
3SMART-BERTDev Pearson Correlation90—Unverified
4MT-DNN-SMARTPearson Correlation0.93—Unverified
5StructBERTRoBERTa ensemblePearson Correlation0.93—Unverified
6Mnet-SimPearson Correlation0.93—Unverified
7XLNet (single model)Pearson Correlation0.93—Unverified
8ALBERTPearson Correlation0.93—Unverified
9T5-11BPearson Correlation0.93—Unverified
10RoBERTaPearson Correlation0.92—Unverified
#ModelMetricClaimedVerifiedStatus
1AnglE-UAESpearman Correlation84.54—Unverified
2ST5-XXLSpearman Correlation82.63—Unverified
3ST5-LargeSpearman Correlation81.83—Unverified
4ST5-XLSpearman Correlation81.66—Unverified
5ST5-BaseSpearman Correlation81.14—Unverified
6MPNet-multilingualSpearman Correlation80.73—Unverified
7SGPT-5.8B-nliSpearman Correlation80.53—Unverified
8MPNetSpearman Correlation80.28—Unverified
9MiniLM-L12Spearman Correlation79.8—Unverified
10SimCSE-BERT-supSpearman Correlation79.12—Unverified
#ModelMetricClaimedVerifiedStatus
1MT-DNN-SMARTAccuracy93.7—Unverified
2ALBERTAccuracy93.4—Unverified
3RoBERTa (ensemble)Accuracy92.3—Unverified
4BigBirdF191.5—Unverified
5StructBERTRoBERTa ensembleAccuracy91.5—Unverified
6FLOATER-largeAccuracy91.4—Unverified
7SMARTAccuracy91.3—Unverified
8RoBERTa-large 355M (MLP quantized vector-wise, fine-tuned)Accuracy91—Unverified
9RoBERTa-large 355M + Entailment as Few-shot LearnerF191—Unverified
10SpanBERTAccuracy90.9—Unverified
#ModelMetricClaimedVerifiedStatus
1PromCSE-RoBERTa-large (0.355B)Spearman Correlation0.82—Unverified
2PromptEOL+CSE+LLaMA-30BSpearman Correlation0.82—Unverified
3PromptEOL+CSE+OPT-13BSpearman Correlation0.82—Unverified
4SimCSE-RoBERTalargeSpearman Correlation0.82—Unverified
5PromptEOL+CSE+OPT-2.7BSpearman Correlation0.81—Unverified
6SentenceBERTSpearman Correlation0.75—Unverified
7SRoBERTa-NLI-baseSpearman Correlation0.74—Unverified
8SRoBERTa-NLI-largeSpearman Correlation0.74—Unverified
9Dino (STS/̄🦕)Spearman Correlation0.74—Unverified
10SBERT-NLI-largeSpearman Correlation0.74—Unverified
#ModelMetricClaimedVerifiedStatus
1AnglE-LLaMA-7BSpearman Correlation0.91—Unverified
2AnglE-LLaMA-7B-v2Spearman Correlation0.91—Unverified
3PromptEOL+CSE+LLaMA-30BSpearman Correlation0.9—Unverified
4PromptEOL+CSE+OPT-13BSpearman Correlation0.9—Unverified
5PromptEOL+CSE+OPT-2.7BSpearman Correlation0.9—Unverified
6PromCSE-RoBERTa-large (0.355B)Spearman Correlation0.89—Unverified
7Trans-Encoder-BERT-large-bi (unsup.)Spearman Correlation0.89—Unverified
8Trans-Encoder-BERT-large-cross (unsup.)Spearman Correlation0.88—Unverified
9Trans-Encoder-RoBERTa-large-cross (unsup.)Spearman Correlation0.88—Unverified
10SimCSE-RoBERTa-largeSpearman Correlation0.87—Unverified