The DOI matches its DataCite record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 4 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter
Open accessAbstract
As Transfer Learning from large-scale pre-trained models becomes more prevalent in Natural Language Processing (NLP), operating these large models in on-the-edge and/or under constrained computational training or inference budgets remains challenging. In this work, we propose a method to pre-train a smaller general-purpose language representation model, called DistilBERT, which can then be fine-tuned with good performances on a wide range of tasks like its larger counterparts. While most prior work investigated the use of distillation for building task-specific models, we leverage knowledge distillation during the pre-training phase and show that it is possible to reduce the size of a BERT model by 40%, while retaining 97% of its language understanding capabilities and being 60% faster. To leverage the inductive biases learned by larger models during pre-training, we introduce a triple loss combining language modeling, distillation and cosine-distance losses. Our smaller, faster and lighter model is cheaper to pre-train and we demonstrate its capabilities for on-device computations in a proof-of-concept experiment and a comparative on-device study.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
DistilBERT is a distilled version of BERT pre-trained with knowledge distillation, reducing parameters by 40% while retaining 97% of BERT’s GLUE performance and running 60% faster at inference. It is presented as a general-purpose, lighter model suitable for constrained and on-device NLP applications.
Key findings
- DistilBERT has 66M parameters vs. BERT-base’s 110M and takes 410s vs. 668s for a CPU inference pass on STS-B, i.e. 40% smaller and 60% faster.
- On GLUE dev sets, DistilBERT scores 77.0 macro-score vs. BERT-base’s 79.5, retaining 97% of performance; it is always on par or improving over the ELMo baseline.
- On IMDb test accuracy, DistilBERT reaches 92.82 vs. BERT-base’s 93.46; on SQuAD v1.1, DistilBERT reaches 77.7/85.8 EM/F1 vs. BERT-base’s 81.2/88.5.
- Ablations show removing the cosine loss costs -2.96 GLUE macro-score, removing distillation loss costs -1.46, removing MLM loss costs -0.31, and random initialization costs -3.69.
Methods
- Knowledge distillation during pre-training: a student with BERT’s architecture but half the layers, no token-type embeddings and no pooler, initialized from every other teacher layer.
- Training objective is a triple loss combining distillation loss \(L_{ce}\), masked language modeling loss \(L_{mlm}\), and cosine embedding loss \(L_{cos}\), using softmax-temperature.
- Trained on English Wikipedia + Toronto Book Corpus with large batches up to 4K examples, dynamic masking, no next-sentence prediction, on 8 16GB V100 GPUs for approximately 90 hours; evaluated on GLUE, IMDb, SQuAD v1.1, CPU inference, and an iPhone 7 Plus on-device proof-of-concept.
Limitations
- The paper does not state an explicit limitations section.
- Evident from the text: evaluation is limited to English benchmarks and a small set of downstream tasks, and the on-device study is described as a proof-of-concept; the model could be further reduced with quantization.
- Evident from the text: the SQuAD second-distillation result is reported inconsistently—the prose says 79.8 F1 and 70.4 EM, while Table 2 lists DistilBERT (D) as 79.1/86.9.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
15 Own result · 6 Own interpretation · 2 Own method · 2 No basis given · 1 Supported · 1 Partly supported · 1 Sources not found · accuracy not yet measured
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we leverage knowledge distillation during the pre-training phase and show that it is possible to reduce the size of a BERT model by 40%, while retaining 97% of its language understanding capabilities and being 60% faster.”
- Also stated in: § Size and inference speed · p. 4 · plain
“DistilBERT has 40% fewer parameters than BERT and is 60% faster than BERT.”
- Also stated in: § 6 Conclusion and future work · p. 5 · plain
“We introduced DistilBERT, a general-purpose pre-trained version of BERT, 40% smaller, 60% faster, that retains 97% of the language understanding capabilities.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Size and inference speed · p. 4 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we propose a method to pre-train a smaller generalpurpose language representation model, called DistilBERT, which can then be finetuned with good performances on a wide range of tasks like its larger counterparts.”
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
“Our general-purpose pre-trained models can be fine-tuned with good performances on several downstream tasks, keeping the flexibility of larger models.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further ablation studies indicate that all the components of the triple loss are important for best performances.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Excluding the tokenization step, DistilBERT is 71% faster than BERT, and the whole model weighs 207 MB (which could be further reduced with quantization).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we leverage knowledge distillation during the pre-training phase and show that it is possible to reduce the size of a BERT model by 40%, while retaining 97% of its language understanding capabilities and being 60% faster.”
- Also stated in: § Size and inference speed · p. 4 · plain
“DistilBERT has 40% fewer parameters than BERT and is 60% faster than BERT.”
- Also stated in: § 6 Conclusion and future work · p. 5 · plain
“We introduced DistilBERT, a general-purpose pre-trained version of BERT, 40% smaller, 60% faster, that retains 97% of the language understanding capabilities.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Inference speed measured on a single GLUE task (STS-B) on CPU is representative of DistilBERT's speed advantage generally.
- Also stated in: § Size and inference speed · p. 4 · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we propose a method to pre-train a smaller generalpurpose language representation model, called DistilBERT”
- Also stated in: § 6 Conclusion and future work · p. 5 · plain
“We introduced DistilBERT, a general-purpose pre-trained version of BERT”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 6 Conclusion and future work · p. 5 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found it beneficial to add a cosine embedding loss ( L cos ) which will tend to align the directions of the student and teacher hidden states vectors.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On SQuAD, DistilBERT is within 3.9 points of the full BERT.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we leverage knowledge distillation during the pre-training phase and show that it is possible to reduce the size of a BERT model by 40%, while retaining 97% of its language understanding capabilities and being 60% faster.”
- Also stated in: § 4 Experiments · p. 3 · plain
“DistilBERT also compares surprisingly well to BERT, retaining 97% of the performance with 40% fewer parameters.”
- Also stated in: § 6 Conclusion and future work · p. 5 · plain
“We introduced DistilBERT, a general-purpose pre-trained version of BERT, 40% smaller, 60% faster, that retains 97% of the language understanding capabilities.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 4 Experiments · p. 3 · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“removing the Masked Language Modeling loss has little impact while the two distillation losses account for a large portion of the performance.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 7
- It may state two separate claims as one. 2
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“environmental cost of exponentially scaling these models' computational requirements as mentioned in Schwartz et al. [2019], Strubell et al. [2019].”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Schwartz et al., 2019 source
The Abstract (p. 1) says the computations required for deep learning research have been doubling every few months and have a large carbon footprint. Section 2, “Red AI” (p. 4), likewise warns that the environmental cost of increasingly large models will not decrease soon. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Partly supportedcites Strubell et al., 2019 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page unavailable) says that computationally hungry NLP models require considerable energy and have associated environmental costs. It also says model development can multiply those costs thousands of times, but it does not establish that the models’ computational requirements are scaling exponentially. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“We applied best practices for training BERT model recently proposed in Liu et al. [2019].”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Liu et al., 2019 source
The Introduction (p. 1) says Liu et al. propose an improved recipe for training BERT, and Section 4 (p. 4) evaluates which choices matter for BERT pretraining. The citing authors’ statement that they applied those practices to DistilBERT describes their own work, not a finding attributed to Liu et al. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among the 9 tasks, DistilBERT is always on par or improving over the ELMo baseline (up to 19 points of accuracy on STS-B).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this case, we were able to reach interesting performances given the size of the model: 79.8 F1 and 70.4 EM, i.e. within 3 points of the full model.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We further demonstrated that DistilBERT is a compelling option for edge applications.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“BERT and DistilBERT results are the medians of 5 runs with different seeds.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“current research 1 on pre-trained models indicates that training even larger models still leads to better performances on downstream tasks.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites MegatronLM
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We report scores on the development sets for each task by fine-tuning DistilBERT without the use of ensembling or multi-tasking scheme for fine-tuning (which are mostly orthogonal to the present work).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While most prior work investigated the use of distillation for building task-specific models, we leverage knowledge distillation during the pre-training phase”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
Operating large pre-trained models on-device in real-time is hampered by their growing computational and memory requirements.
“the growing computational and memory requirements of these models may hamper wide adoption.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Near-zero probabilities in a trained model's output distribution reflect its generalization capabilities.
“some of these”
The paper relies on this without support.
Inference speed measured on a single GLUE task (STS-B) on CPU is representative of DistilBERT's speed advantage generally.
“Inference time of a full pass of GLUE task STS-B (sentiment analysis) on CPU with a batch size of 1.”
“DistilBERT has 40% fewer parameters than BERT and is 60% faster than BERT.”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This idea has been successfully applied to LLMs, where distilled students approximate the generation patterns of larger teachers while retaining much of their performance (Sanh et al., 2019).”
From Vision-Guided Iterative Refinement for Frontend Code Generation (2026) · cites this paper as Sanh et al., 2019
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“even benchmarking is not a reliable estimator of parameter count [12], [15], [28], [29]”
From Hollow-LLM Attack: Computationally Trivial Weights in Zero-Knowledge Verification of LLM Inference (2026) · cites this paper as [29]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“It achieves similar performance to the original BERT model while using fewer resources. The approach leveraged knowledge distillation during the pretraining phase and reduced the size of general BERT by 40%, yet it retained a language understanding capability of 97%.”
From A Review on Deep-Learning-Based Cyberbullying Detection (2023) · cites this paper as [53]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Unlike in many similar circumstances, we do not employ knowledge distillation [56], because we discovered that for our sizes of the models, this technique does not provide any quality improvement.”
From Full Line Code Completion: Bringing AI to Desktop (2024) · cites this paper as [56]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ 4.1 Downstream task benchmark · p. 3
“In this case, we were able to reach interesting performances given the size of the model: 79.8 F1 and 70.4 EM, i.e. within 3 points of the full model.”
§ 3 DistilBERT: a distilled version of BERT · p. 3
“| DistilBERT (D) | - | 79.1/86.9 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“DistilBERT is always on par or improving over the ELMo baseline (up to 19 points of accuracy on STS-B).”
Reported 19 · recomputed 16.5
Citations
Cites
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, L., & Polosukhin, I. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.03762 · Cited by 120,404
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1423 · Cited by 54,325
RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach
Liu, Y., Ott, M., Goyal, N., Du, J., Joshi, M., Chen, D., Levy, O., Lewis, M., Zettlemoyer, L., & Stoyanov, V. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.11692 · Cited by 16,515
Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Network
Hinton, G., Vinyals, O., & Dean, J. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1503.02531 · Cited by 14,204
Deep Contextualized Word Representations
Peters, M., Neumann, M., Iyyer, M., Gardner, M., Clark, C., Lee, K., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1202 · Cited by 11,983
Transformers: State-of-the-Art Natural Language Processing
Wolf, T., Debut, L., Sanh, V., Chaumond, J., Delangue, C., Moi, A., Cistac, P., Rault, T., Louf, R., Funtowicz, M., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-demos.6 · Cited by 8,741
Self-citationSQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Text
Rajpurkar, P., Zhang, J., Lopyrev, K., & Liang, P. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d16-1264 · Cited by 6,208
GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understanding
Wang, A., Singh, A., Michael, J., Hill, F., Levy, O., & Bowman, S. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 EMNLP Workshop BlackboxNLP: Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP · doi:10.18653/v1/w18-5446 · Cited by 4,222
Learning Word Vectors for Sentiment Analysis
Maas, A. L., Daly, R. E., Pham, P. T., Huang, D., Ng, A. Y., & Potts, C. (2011) · Cited by 3,710
Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLP
Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019) · Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/p19-1355 · Cited by 3,684
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Cristian Bucila, Rich Caruana, and Alexandru Niculescu-Mizil. Model compression. In KDD , 2006.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,001–1,100 of 4,692
Improving question answering for event-focused questions in temporal collections of news articles
Wang, J., Jatowt, A., Färber, M., & Yoshikawa, M. (2021) · Information Retrieval · doi:10.1007/s10791-020-09387-9 · Cited by 21
Mulyar, A., Schumacher, E., Rouhizadeh, M., & Dredze, M. H. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.13664 · Cited by 29
Emergence of Separable Manifolds in Deep Language RepresentationsPreprint
Mamou, J., Le, H., Rio, M. D., Stephenson, C., Tang, H., Kim, Y., & Chung, S. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2006.01095 · Cited by 25
Transformers: "The End of History" for NLP?Preprint
Chernyavskiy, A., Ilvovsky, D., & Nakov, P. (2021) · ECML/PKDD · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2105.00813 · Cited by 36
Analyzing and Mitigating Interference in Neural Architecture SearchPreprint
Xu, J., Tan, X., Song, K., Luo, R., Leng, Y., Qin, T., Liu, T., & Li, J. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.12821 · Cited by 22
Santhanam, S., Hedayatnia, B., Gella, S., Padmakumar, A., Kim, S., Liu, Y., & Hakkani-Tur, D. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.05456 · Cited by 21
NLP From Scratch Without Large-Scale Pretraining: A Simple and Efficient FrameworkPreprint
Yao, X., Zheng, Y., Yang, X., & Yang, Z. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2111.04130 · Cited by 26
Lück, S., Callaghan, M., Borchers, M., Cowie, A., Fuss, S., Gidden, M., Hartmann, J., Kammann, C. I., Keller, D. P., Kraxner, F., et al. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-61485-8 · Cited by 36
Pre-trained Data Augmentation for Text Classification
Abonizio, H., & Barbon, S. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-61377-8_38 · Cited by 23
Adversarial Self-Supervised Data-Free Distillation for Text Classification
Ma, X., Shen, Y., Fang, G., Chen, C., Jia, C., & Lü, W. (2020) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.499 · Cited by 23
Barclay, I., Taylor, H., Preece, A. D., Taylor, I., Verma, D. C., & de Mel, G. R. (2020) · Concurrency and Computation Practice and Experience · doi:10.1002/cpe.6129 · Cited by 20
Are we there yet? Exploring clinical domain knowledge of BERT models
Sushil, M., Šuster, S., & Daelemans, W. M. P. (2021) · Workshop on Biomedical Language Processing (BioNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.bionlp-1.5 · Cited by 22
Shi, Y., Ren, P., Zhang, Y., Gong, X., Hu, M., & Liang, H. (2021) · Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics · doi:10.3389/frma.2021.670006 · Cited by 21
Learning to Solve NLP Tasks in an Incremental Number of Languages
Castellucci, G., Filice, S., Croce, D., & Basili, R. (2021) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.acl-short.106 · Cited by 21
Wang, D., Zhang, S., & Wang, L. (2021) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v35i17.17812 · Cited by 20
Emotion Recognition on Edge Devices: Training and Deployment
Pandelea, V., Ragusa, E., Apicella, T., Gastaldo, P., & Cambria, E. (2021) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s21134496 · Cited by 21
IrEne: Interpretable Energy Prediction for Transformers
Cao, Q., Lal, Y. K., Trivedi, H. K., Balasubramanian, A., & Balasubramanian, N. (2021) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.167 · Cited by 27
EfficientBERT: Progressively Searching Multilayer Perceptron via Warm-up Knowledge Distillation
Dong, C., Wang, G., Xu, H., Peng, J., Ren, X., & Liang, X. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.123 · Cited by 22
Enhanced sentiment extraction architecture for social media content analysis using capsule networks
Demotte, P., Wijegunarathna, K., Meedeniya, D., & Perera, I. (2021) · Multimedia Tools and Applications · doi:10.1007/s11042-021-11471-1 · Cited by 27
A Multimodal Deep Framework for Derogatory Social Media Post Identification of a Recognized Person
Bhowmick, R. S., Ganguli, I., Paul, J., & Sil, J. (2021) · ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing · doi:10.1145/3447651 · Cited by 21
Towards Grad-CAM Based Explainability in a Legal Text Processing Pipeline. Extended Version
Górski, Ł., Ramakrishna, S., & Nowosielski, J. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-89811-3_11 · Cited by 20
Li, C., Knopman, D. S., Xu, W., Cohen, T., & Pakhomov, S. (2022) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.acl-long.131 · Cited by 22
A Simple Hash-Based Early Exiting Approach For Language Understanding and Generation
Sun, T., Liu, X., Zhu, W., Geng, Z., Wu, L., He, Y., Ni, Y., Xie, G., Huang, X., & Qiu, X. (2022) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.findings-acl.189 · Cited by 26
Geoscience language models and their intrinsic evaluation
Lawley, C. J. M., Raimondo, S., Chen, T., Brin, L., Zakharov, A., Kur, D., Hui, J., Newton, G., Burgoyne, S. L., & Marquis, G. (2022) · Applied Computing and Geosciences · doi:10.1016/j.acags.2022.100084 · Cited by 23
Bozuyla, M., & Özçift, A. (2021) · TURKISH JOURNAL OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING & COMPUTER SCIENCES · doi:10.55730/1300-0632.3818 · Cited by 21
Named Entity Recognition for Drone Forensic Using BERT and DistilBERT
Silalahi, S., Ahmad, T., & Studiawan, H. (2022) · International Conference on Data Science and Its Applications (ICoDSA) · doi:10.1109/icodsa55874.2022.9862916 · Cited by 20
Chng, S. Y., Tern, P. J. W., Kan, R. X. M., & Cheng, L. T. (2023) · Health care science · doi:10.1002/hcs2.40 · Cited by 20
Higuchi, Y., Yan, B., Arora, S., Ogawa, T., Kobayashi, T., & Watanabe, S. (2022) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.findings-emnlp.402 · Cited by 22
Ghanadian, H., Nejadgholi, I., & Osman, H. A. (2023) · Workshop on Computational Approaches to Subjectivity, Sentiment and Social Media Analysis (WASSA) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.wassa-1.16 · Cited by 26
Characterizing the Entities in Harmful Memes: Who is the Hero, the Villain, the Victim?
Sharma, S., Kulkarni, A., Suresh, T., Mathur, H., Nakov, P., Akhtar, M. S., & Chakraborty, T. (2023) · Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.eacl-main.157 · Cited by 28
Energy and Carbon Considerations of Fine-Tuning BERT
Wang, X., Na, C., Strubell, E., Friedler, S. A., & Luccioni, A. S. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.607 · Cited by 33
Momentum Cross-Modal Contrastive Learning for Video Moment Retrieval
Han, D. G., Cheng, X., Guo, N., Ye, X., Rainer, B., & Priller, P. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2023.3344097 · Cited by 24
KnowledgeVIS: Interpreting Language Models by Comparing Fill-in-the-Blank Prompts
Coscia, A. J., & Endert, A. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2023.3346713 · Cited by 22
Sutranggono, A. N., Sarno, R., & Ghozali, I. (2024) · Journal of Information and Communication Technology · doi:10.32890/jict2024.23.1.4 · Cited by 26
Unlabeled learning algorithms and operations: overview and future trends in defense sector
Oliveira, E. E., Rodrigues, M., Pereira, J. P., Lopes, A. M., Mestric, I. I., & Bjelogrlic, S. (2024) · Artificial Intelligence Review · doi:10.1007/s10462-023-10692-0 · Cited by 27
Flexible Keyword Spotting Based on Homogeneous Audio-Text Embedding
Nishu, K., Cho, M., Dixon, P. R., & Naik, D. K. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/icassp48485.2024.10447547 · Cited by 20
X-News dataset for online news categorization
Yousafzai, S. N., Shahbaz, H., Ali, A., Qamar, A., Nasir, I. M., Tehsin, S., & Damaševičius, R. (2024) · International Journal of Intelligent Computing and Cybernetics · doi:10.1108/ijicc-04-2024-0184 · Cited by 24
Luo, X., Liu, D., Kong, H., Huai, S., Chen, H., Xiong, G., & Liu, W. (2024) · ACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3701728 · Cited by 27
EmTract: Extracting emotions from social media
Vamossy, D. F., & Skog, R. P. (2024) · International Review of Financial Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103769 · Cited by 22
Intermediate Training of BERT for Product Matching.
Peeters, R., Bizer, C., & Glavaš, G. (2020) · MADOC (University of Mannheim) · Cited by 21
Wang, S. Y., Tseng, B., & Hernandez‐Boussard, T. (2021) · International Journal of Medical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2021.104464 · Cited by 20
Identifying Medical Self-Disclosure in Online Communities
Valizadeh, M., Ranjbar-Noiey, P., Caragea, C., & Parde, N. (2021) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.347 · Cited by 25
Sentiment and structure in word co-occurrence networks on Twitter
Fudolig, M. I., Alshaabi, T., Arnold, M., Danforth, C. M., & Dodds, P. S. (2022) · Applied Network Science · doi:10.1007/s41109-022-00446-2 · Cited by 22
Effective Explanations for Entity Resolution Models
Teofili, T., Firmani, D., Koudas, N., Martello, V., Merialdo, P., & Srivastava, D. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) · doi:10.1109/icde53745.2022.00248 · Cited by 22
Contextualized Perturbation for Textual Adversarial AttackPreprint
Li, D., Zhang, Y., Peng, H., Chen, L., Brockett, C., Sun, M., & Dolan, B. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2009.07502 · Cited by 20
CATBERT: Context-Aware Tiny BERT for Detecting Social Engineering EmailsPreprint
Lee, Y., Saxe, J., & Harang, R. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2010.03484 · Cited by 43
Parameter-Efficient Transfer Learning with Diff Pruning
Guo, D., Rush, A. M., & Kim, Y. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2012.07463 · Cited by 20
AutoFreeze: Automatically Freezing Model Blocks to Accelerate Fine-tuningPreprint
Liu, Y., Agarwal, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.01386 · Cited by 75
Optimizing Dynamic-Shape Neural Networks on Accelerators via On-the-Fly Micro-Kernel Polymerization
Yu, F., Li, G., Zhao, J., Cui, H., Feng, X., & Xue, J. (2024) · International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS) · doi:10.1145/3620665.3640390 · Cited by 22
A novel approach for application classification with encrypted traffic using BERT and packet headers
Yu, J., Choi, Y., Koo, K., & Moon, D. (2024) · Computer Networks · doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2024.110747 · Cited by 23
Transfer learning for software vulnerability prediction using Transformer models
Kalouptsoglou, I., Siavvas, M., Ampatzoglou, A., Kehagias, D. D., & Chatzigeorgiou, A. (2025) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2025.112448 · Cited by 21
Efficient LLMs for Edge Devices: Pruning, Quantization, and Distillation Techniques
Agrawal, R., Kumar, H., & Lnu, S. R. (2025) · 2025 International Conference on Machine Learning and Autonomous Systems (ICMLAS) · doi:10.1109/icmlas64557.2025.10968787 · Cited by 21
Foreign Interference in the 2020 Election: Tools for Detecting Online Election Interference
Marcellino, W., Johnson, C., Posard, M. N., & Helmus, T. C. (2020) · RAND Corporation eBooks · doi:10.7249/rra704-2 · Cited by 19
Probing Task-Oriented Dialogue Representation from Language Models
Wu, C.-S., & Xiong, C. (2020) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.409 · Cited by 20
Exploring Gender Biases in Information Retrieval Relevance Judgement Datasets
Bigdeli, A., Arabzadeh, N., Zihayat, M., & Bagheri, E. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72240-1_18 · Cited by 20
Capturing Semantics for Imputation with Pre-trained Language Models
Mei, Y., Song, S., Fang, C., Yang, H., Fang, J., & Long, J. (2021) · IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) · doi:10.1109/icde51399.2021.00013 · Cited by 21
Controllable Summarization with Constrained Markov Decision Process
Chan, H. P., Wang, L., & King, I. (2021) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00423 · Cited by 23
Towards retrieval-based conversational recommendation
Manzoor, A., & Jannach, D. (2022) · Information Systems · doi:10.1016/j.is.2022.102083 · Cited by 20
Building a Chatbot for Supporting the Admission of Universities
Nguyen, M.-T., Tran-Tien, M., Viet, A. P., Vu, H.-T., & Nguyen, V.-H. (2021) · International Conference on Knowledge and Systems Engineering/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/kse53942.2021.9648677 · Cited by 22
iSEA: An Interactive Pipeline for Semantic Error Analysis of NLP Models
Yuan, J., Vig, J., & Rajani, N. F. (2022) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/3490099.3511146 · Cited by 19
PictoBERT: Transformers for next pictogram prediction
Pereira, J., Macêdo, D., Zanchettin, C., Oliveira, A. L. I., & Fidalgo, R. (2022) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2022.117231 · Cited by 19
Visual Commonsense in Pretrained Unimodal and Multimodal Models
Zhang, C., Durme, B. V., Li, Z., & Stengel-Eskin, E. (2022) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.naacl-main.390 · Cited by 19
Towards Fine-grained Classification of Climate Change related Social Media Text
Vaid, R., Pant, K., & Shrivastava, M. (2022) · Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Student Research Workshop (ACL SRW) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.acl-srw.35 · Cited by 20
What users’ musical preference on Twitter reveals about psychological disorders
Alavijeh, S. Z., Zarrinkalam, F., Noorian, Z., Mehrpour, A., & Etminani, K. (2023) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2023.103269 · Cited by 23
Suicidal Intention Detection in Tweets Using BERT-Based Transformers
Ananthakrishnan, G., Jayaraman, A. K., Trueman, T. E., Mitra, S., K, A. A., & Murugappan, A. (2022) · International Conference on Computing, Communication, and Intelligent Systems (ICCCIS) · doi:10.1109/icccis56430.2022.10037677 · Cited by 24
Arroni, S., Galán, Y., Guzmán-Guzmán, X., Núñez‐Valdéz, E. R., & Gómez, A. (2023) · International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.9781/ijimai.2023.02.005 · Cited by 23
SemEval-2023 Task 5: Clickbait Spoiling
Fröbe, M., Stein, B., Gollub, T., Hagen, M., & Potthast, M. (2023) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.semeval-1.312 · Cited by 21
Gupta, R., Roy, A., Christensen, C., Kim, S., Gerard, S., Cincebeaux, M., Divakaran, A., Grindal, T., & Shah, M. A. (2023) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01908 · Cited by 23
EnML: Multi-label Ensemble Learning for Urdu Text Classification
Mehmood, F., Shahzadi, R., Ghafoor, H., Asim, M. N., Khan, M. U. G., Mahmood, W., & Dengel, A. R. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing · doi:10.1145/3616111 · Cited by 21
Deep learning-based software bug classification
Meher, J. P., Biswas, S., & Mall, R. (2023) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107350 · Cited by 24
Kamel: A Scalable BERT-Based System for Trajectory Imputation
Musleh, M., & Mokbel, M. F. (2023) · Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment · doi:10.14778/3632093.3632113 · Cited by 20
JustiLM: Few-shot Justification Generation for Explainable Fact-Checking of Real-world Claims
Zeng, F., & Gao, W. G. (2024) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00649 · Cited by 28
Demystifying large language models in second language development research
Cong, Y. (2024) · Computer Speech & Language · doi:10.1016/j.csl.2024.101700 · Cited by 22
NAYER: Noisy Layer Data Generation for Efficient and Effective Data-free Knowledge Distillation
Tran, M. T., Le, T., Le, X.-M. T., Harandi, M. T., Tran, Q. H., & Phung, D. (2024) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr52733.2024.02252 · Cited by 21
Are chatbots reliable text annotators? Sometimes
Kristensen‐McLachlan, R. D., Canavan, M., Kardos, M., Jacobsen, M., & Aarøe, L. (2025) · PNAS Nexus · doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf069 · Cited by 28
Towards Machine Learning Explainability in Text Classification for Fake News Detection
Kurasinski, L., & Mihailescu, R. (2020) · International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications · doi:10.1109/icmla51294.2020.00127 · Cited by 25
CHARM: Inferring Personal Attributes from Conversations
Tigunova, A., Yates, A., Mirza, P., & Weikum, G. (2020) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.434 · Cited by 18
Özyurt, İ. B. (2020) · Workshop on Scholarly Document Processing (SDP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.sdp-1.12 · Cited by 18
Offensive language identification in Dravidian code mixed social media text
Saumya, S., Kumar, A., & Singh, J. P. (2021) · Cited by 19
Liu, H., Zhang, D., Yin, B., & Zhu, X. (2021) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.naacl-main.83 · Cited by 23
Universal-KD: Attention-based Output-Grounded Intermediate Layer Knowledge Distillation
Wu, Y., Rezagholizadeh, M., Ghaddar, A., Haidar, M. A., & Ghodsi, A. (2021) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.603 · Cited by 20
Nejadgholi, I., Fraser, K., & de Bruijn, B. (2020) · Workshop on Biomedical Language Processing (BioNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.bionlp-1.19 · Cited by 22
EduBERT: Pretrained Deep Language Models for Learning AnalyticsPreprint
Clavié, B., & Gal, K. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.00690 · Cited by 47
DialBERT: A Hierarchical Pre-Trained Model for Conversation DisentanglementPreprint
Li, T., Gu, J.-C., Zhu, X., Liu, Q., Ling, Z.-H., Su, Z., & Wei, S. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2004.03760 · Cited by 28
Parallelizing Legendre Memory Unit TrainingPreprint
Chilkuri, N., & Eliasmith, C. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.11417 · Cited by 20
Order in the Court: Explainable AI Methods Prone to DisagreementPreprint
Neely, M., Schouten, S. F., Bleeker, M., & Lučić, A. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2105.03287 · Cited by 39
Polyjuice: Generating Counterfactuals for Explaining, Evaluating, and Improving ModelsPreprint
Wu, T., Ribeiro, M. T., Heer, J., & Weld, D. S. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2101.00288 · Cited by 19
LanguageRefer: Spatial-Language Model for 3D Visual GroundingPreprint
Roh, J., Desingh, K., Farhadi, A., & Fox, D. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2107.03438 · Cited by 21
A Dataset for Detecting Real-World Environmental ClaimsPreprint
Stammbach, D., Webersinke, N., Bingler, J., Kraus, M., & Leippold, M. (2022) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4207369 · Cited by 22
BLP-2023 Task 2: Sentiment Analysis
Hasan, M. A., Alam, F., Anjum, A., Das, S., & Anjum, A. (2023) · Workshop on Bangla Language Processing (BLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.banglalp-1.48 · Cited by 20
Urgency Detection in Social Media Texts Using Natural Language Processing
Makkena, N., Islam, A. R., Varol, C., & An, M. K. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC) · doi:10.1109/icsc59802.2024.00031 · Cited by 18
ChatVTG: Video Temporal Grounding via Chat with Video Dialogue Large Language Models
Qu, M., Chen, X., Liu, W., Li, A., & Zhao, Y. (2024) · IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) · doi:10.1109/cvprw63382.2024.00191 · Cited by 18
Exploring Retrieval Augmented Generation in Arabic
El-Beltagy, S. R., & Abdallah, M. A. (2024) · Procedia Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2024.10.203 · Cited by 24
Alipanahi, R., Safari, L., & Khanteymoori, A. (2024) · Molecular Therapy — Nucleic Acids · doi:10.1016/j.omtn.2024.102370 · Cited by 20
Large Language Models for Psychological Assessment: A Comprehensive Overview
Brickman, J., Gupta, M., & Oltmanns, J. R. (2025) · Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/25152459251343582 · Cited by 24
Discontinuous Constituent Parsing as Sequence Labeling
Vilares, D., & Gómez‐Rodríguez, C. (2020) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-main.221 · Cited by 17
Deception detection in text and its relation to the cultural dimension of individualism/collectivism
Papantoniou, K., Papadakos, P., Patkos, T., Flouris, G., Androutsopoulos, I., & Plexousakis, D. (2021) · Natural Language Engineering · doi:10.1017/s1351324921000152 · Cited by 23
A Large-Scale English Multi-Label Twitter Dataset for Cyberbullying and Online Abuse Detection
Salawu, S., Lumsden, J., & He, Y. (2021) · Workshop on Online Abuse and Harms (WOAH) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.woah-1.16 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Sanh, V., Debut, L., Chaumond, J., & Wolf, T.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2019
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1910.01108
- OpenAlex
- W2978017171
- Cited by
- 4,653
- References
- 18
- Citations by year
- 2026: 67 · 2025: 443 · 2024: 801 · 2023: 1136 · 2022: 736 · 2021: 968 · 2020: 486 · 2019: 15
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Transactions on Graph Data and Knowledge (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- DistilBERT, knowledge distillation, BERT, pre-training, model compression, on-device computation, language modeling, transfer learning
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-23, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-23 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
