PreprintCited by 427Topic ModelingSentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

An efficient framework for learning sentence representations

Open access
Logeswaran, Lajanugen, Lee, Honglak·2018·arXiv

Abstract

In this work we propose a simple and efficient framework for learning sentence representations from unlabelled data. Drawing inspiration from the distributional hypothesis and recent work on learning sentence representations, we reformulate the problem of predicting the context in which a sentence appears as a classification problem. Given a sentence and its context, a classifier distinguishes context sentences from other contrastive sentences based on their vector representations. This allows us to efficiently learn different types of encoding functions, and we show that the model learns high-quality sentence representations. We demonstrate that our sentence representations outperform state-of-the-art unsupervised and supervised representation learning methods on several downstream NLP tasks that involve understanding sentence semantics while achieving an order of magnitude speedup in training time.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1803.02893

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Contrastive learning has resulted in excellent representation learning performance across domains such as computer vision, natural language, speech recognition, and time-series data.

    “This framework has resulted in excellent representation learning performance across domains such as computer vision [12, 33, 35], natural language [49], speech recognition [6, 58] and time-series data [39].”

    From Contrastive Predictive Coding for Human Activity Recognition (2021) · cites this paper as [49]

  • Early results on transfer learning for text classification tasks advocated fine-tuning only the parameters of a small classifier fed sentence embeddings from a fixed pre-trained model.

    “Early results on transfer learning for text classification tasks advocated fine-tuning only the parameters of a small classifier that was fed sentence embeddings produced by a fixed pre-trained model (Subramanian et al., 2018; Kiros et al., 2015; Logeswaran and Lee, 2018; Hill et al., 2016; Conneau et al., 2017).”

    From Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer (2019) · cites this paper as Logeswaran and Lee, 2018

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 33 · Cited by 427

Authors
Logeswaran, L., & Lee, H.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2018
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2786464815
Cited by
427
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 88 · 2020: 94 · 2019: 71 · 2018: 22
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
sentence representation, unsupervised feature learning, distributional hypothesis, contrastive learning, sentence embeddings, semantic understanding, training efficiency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review