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 2,201–2,300 of 4,692
Leverage NLP Models Against Other NLP Models: Two Invisible Feature Space Backdoor Attacks
Li, X., Lu, X. Z., & Li, P. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Reliability · doi:10.1109/tr.2024.3375526 · Cited by 7
Nayak, S., Agarwal, R., Khatri, S. K., et al. (2024) · International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications · doi:10.14569/ijacsa.2024.0150374 · Cited by 6
MotionGPT: Human Motion Synthesis with Improved Diversity and Realism via GPT-3 Prompting
Ribeiro-Gomes, J., Cai, T., Milacski, Z. Á., Wu, C. H., Prakash, A., Takagi, S., Aubel, A., Kim, D., Bernardino, A. J. M., & la Torre, F. D. (2024) · IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision · doi:10.1109/wacv57701.2024.00499 · Cited by 12
Weichselbraun, A., Süsstrunk, N., Waldvogel, R., Glatzl, A., Brașoveanu, A., & Scharl, A. (2024) · Future Internet · doi:10.3390/fi16050144 · Cited by 10
A Review of Data-Driven Approaches for Malicious Website Detection
Hu, Z., & Yuan, Z. (2023) · Asian Conference on Artificial Intelligence Technology (ACAIT) · doi:10.1109/acait60137.2023.10528600 · Cited by 6
Reliability Analysis of Psychological Concept Extraction and Classification in User-Penned Text
Garg, M., Sathvik, M., Raza, S., Chadha, A., & Sohn, S. (2024) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v18i1.31324 · Cited by 6
Adel, S., Elmadany, N., & Sharkas, M. (2024) · International Conference on Machine Intelligence and Smart Innovation (ICMISI) · doi:10.1109/icmisi61517.2024.10580665 · Cited by 6
Action-guided prompt tuning for video grounding
Wang, J., Tsao, R., Wang, X., Wang, X., Feng, F., Tian, S., & Poria, S. (2024) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2024.102577 · Cited by 6
On improving conversational interfaces in educational systems
Wu, Y., Luise, R. S. A.-D., & Arevalillo‐Herráez, M. (2024) · Computer Speech & Language · doi:10.1016/j.csl.2024.101693 · Cited by 8
Shao, D., Su, S.-C., Ma, L., Yi, S., & Lai, H. (2024) · Journal of Intelligent Information Systems · doi:10.1007/s10844-024-00889-2 · Cited by 7
Cross-Document Distillation via Graph-Based Summarization of Extracted Essential Knowledge
Ragazzi, L., Moro, G., Valgimigli, L., & Fiorani, R. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Audio Speech and Language Processing · doi:10.1109/taslp.2024.3490375 · Cited by 8
A Workload Characterization Methodology Using Supervised and Unsupervised Deep Learning
Hu, B., Kempf, K. G., & Mason, N. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3509857 · Cited by 6
STraVEns: Sentence Transformer Voting Ensemble for Intent Classification-Based Chatbot Model
Pravitasari, A. A., Asnawi, M. H., Helen, A., Handoko, B., Kusuma, D. A., Herawan, T., & Hendrawati, T. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3519223 · Cited by 8
Task Planning for Long-Horizon Cooking Tasks Based on Large Language Models
Shin, J., Han, J., Kim, W., Oh, Y., & Kim, E. (2024) · IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) · doi:10.1109/iros58592.2024.10801687 · Cited by 6
DisTGranD: Granular event/sub-event classification for disaster response
Adesokan, A., Madria, S., & Nguyen, L. (2024) · Online Social Networks and Media · doi:10.1016/j.osnem.2024.100297 · Cited by 6
Matsuura, R., Suzuki, S., Takizawa, K., Saeki, M., & Matsuyama, Y. (2024) · Research Methods in Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100177 · Cited by 10
Immersive exposure to simulated visual hallucinations modulates high-level human cognition
Greco, A., Rastelli, C., Ubaldi, A., & Riva, G. (2025) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2025.103808 · Cited by 8
Wang, X., Mao, A., Pan, S., et al. (2025) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2025.115273 · Cited by 6
Mosaic: Composite projection pruning for resource-efficient LLMs
Eccles, B. J., Wong, L., & Varghese, B. (2025) · Future Generation Computer Systems · doi:10.1016/j.future.2025.108056 · Cited by 7
ProFormer: Towards On-Device LSH Projection Based Transformers
Sankar, C., Ravi, S., & Kozareva, Z. (2021) · Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-main.246 · Cited by 7
KAFK at SemEval-2020 Task 12: Checkpoint Ensemble of Transformers for Hate Speech Classification
Das, K., Baruah, A., Barbhuiya, F. A., & Dey, K. (2020) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.semeval-1.267 · Cited by 6
Developing and Implementing Artificial Intelligence-Based Classifier for Requirements Engineering
Myllynen, S., Suominen, I., Raunio, T., Karell, R., & Lahtinen, J. (2021) · Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science · doi:10.1115/1.4049722 · Cited by 7
Morph Call: Probing Morphosyntactic Content of Multilingual Transformers
Mikhailov, V., Serikov, O., & Artemova, E. (2021) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.sigtyp-1.10 · Cited by 9
Knodle: Modular Weakly Supervised Learning with PyTorch
Sedova, A., Stephan, A., Speranskaya, M., & Roth, B. (2021) · Workshop on Representation Learning for NLP (RepL4NLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.repl4nlp-1.12 · Cited by 7
Russian News Clustering and Headline Selection Shared Task
Gusev, I., Smurov, I., & ABBYY (2021) · Computational Linguistics and Intellectual Technologies · doi:10.28995/2075-7182-2021-20-289-301 · Cited by 6
Towards Target-dependent Sentiment Classification in News Articles
Hamborg, F., Donnay, K., Gipp, B., Toeppe, K., Yan, H., & Chu, S. K. W. (2021) · GRO · Cited by 6
Isotonic Data Augmentation for Knowledge Distillation
Cui, W., & Yan, S. (2021) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2021/319 · Cited by 9
No Fine-Tuning, No Cry: Robust SVD for Compressing Deep Networks
Tukan, M., Maalouf, A., Weksler, M., & Feldman, D. (2021) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s21165599 · Cited by 19
Falke, T., & Lehnen, P. (2021) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.91 · Cited by 6
Let the CAT out of the bag: Contrastive Attributed explanations for Text
Chemmengath, S., Azad, A. P., Luss, R., & Dhurandhar, A. (2022) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.484 · Cited by 8
DACT-BERT: Differentiable Adaptive Computation Time for an Efficient BERT Inference
Eyzaguirre, C., del Rio, F., Araujo, V., & Soto, Á. (2022) · NLPPOWER · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.nlppower-1.10 · Cited by 9
RW-KD: Sample-wise Loss Terms Re-Weighting for Knowledge Distillation
Lu, P., Ghaddar, A., Rashid, A., Rezagholizadeh, M., Ghodsi, A., & Langlais, P. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.270 · Cited by 6
Meta-learning for compressed language model: A multiple choice question answering study
Yan, M., & Pan, Y. F. (2021) · Neurocomputing · doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2021.01.148 · Cited by 6
Multiple Teacher Distillation for Robust and Greener Models
Ilichev, A., Sorokin, N., Huawei Noah’s Ark lab, M., Malykh, V., Huawei Noah’s Ark lab, M., Piontkovskaya, I., & Huawei Noah’s Ark lab, M. (2021) · International conference Recent advances in natural language processing · doi:10.26615/978-954-452-072-4_068 · Cited by 6
Financial Time Series Forecasting Enriched with Textual Information
Cruz, L. F. S. A., & Silva, D. F. (2021) · International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications · doi:10.1109/icmla52953.2021.00066 · Cited by 7
Prompting to Distill: Boosting Data-Free Knowledge Distillation via Reinforced Prompt
Ma, X., Wang, X., Fang, G., Shen, Y., & Lü, W. (2022) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2022/596 · Cited by 6
COVID-19 Sentiment Analysis applying BERT
Rifat, N., Ahsan, M., Gomes, R., & Chowdhury, M. M. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Electro Information Technology · doi:10.1109/eit53891.2022.9813777 · Cited by 6
Huertas-García, Á., Liz-López, H., Villar-Rodríguez, G., Martı́n, A., Huertas‐Tato, J., & Camacho, D. (2022) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.semeval-1.107 · Cited by 7
Attention Fusion: a light yet efficient late fusion mechanism for task adaptation in NLU
Cao, J. P., Prakash, C. S., & Hamza, W. (2022) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: NAACL · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.findings-naacl.64 · Cited by 7
Analysis on Tweets Towards COVID-19 Pandemic: An Application of Text-Based Depression Detection
Kaseb, A., Galal, O., & Elreedy, D. (2022) · Novel Intelligent and Leading Emerging Sciences Conference (NILES) · doi:10.1109/niles56402.2022.9942363 · Cited by 6
An efficient approach to identifying anti-government sentiment on Twitter during Michigan protests
Nguyen, H., & Gokhale, S. S. (2022) · PeerJ Computer Science · doi:10.7717/peerj-cs.1127 · Cited by 7
A Machine Learning based Approach to Identify User Interests from Social Data
Tahir, R., & Naeem, M. A. (2022) · International Multi-Topic Conference · doi:10.1109/inmic56986.2022.9972956 · Cited by 6
Who wants to be a Click-Millionaire? On the Influence of Thumbnails and Captions
Koller, T., & Gräbner, H. (2022) · Proceedings - International Conference on Pattern Recognition/Proceedings/International Conference on Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/icpr56361.2022.9956202 · Cited by 6
Efficient Transformers for on-robot Natural Language Understanding
Greco, A., Roberto, A., Saggese, A., & Vento, M. (2022) · IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids) · doi:10.1109/humanoids53995.2022.10000085 · Cited by 6
Transformer-based Language models for the Identification of Idiomatic Expressions
Arachchige, I. A. N., Suraweera, S. M. D. A. S., & Herath, D. L. (2022) · International Conference EUROPHRAS · doi:10.26615/978-954-452-080-9_015 · Cited by 6
Bilaterally Slimmable Transformer for Elastic and Efficient Visual Question Answering
Zhou, Y., Jin, Z., Yu, J., Xu, M., Wang, H., & Jianping Fan, B. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Multimedia · doi:10.1109/tmm.2023.3254205 · Cited by 6
Document Provenance and Authentication through Authorship Classification
Zamir, M. T., Ayub, M. A., Khan, J., Ikram, M. J., Ahmad, N., & Ahmad, K. (2023) · International Conference on Advanced Innovations in Smart Cities (ICAISC) · doi:10.1109/icaisc56366.2023.10085330 · Cited by 6
Data Leakage in Cross-Modal Retrieval Training: A Case Study
Weck, B., & Serra, X. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/icassp49357.2023.10094617 · Cited by 6
Confidence-Based Event-Centric Online Video Question Answering on a Newly Constructed ATBS Dataset
Kong, W., Ye, S., Yao, C., & Ren, J. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/icassp49357.2023.10095044 · Cited by 6
Stochastically Pruning Large Language Models Using Sparsity Regularization and Compressive Sensing
Islam, M. M., & Alawad, M. (2023) · ACM Great Lakes Symposium on VLSI (GLSVLSI) · doi:10.1145/3583781.3590232 · Cited by 6
Sentimental Analysis on IMDb Movies Review using BERT
Arora, K., Gupta, N., & Pathak, S. (2023) · International Conference on Electronics and Sustainable Communication Systems (ICESC) · doi:10.1109/icesc57686.2023.10193688 · Cited by 6
Out-of-Distribution Detection in Deep Learning Models: A Feature Space-Based Approach
Carvalho, T. M., Vellasco, M. M. B. R., & Amaral, J. F. (2023) · International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn54540.2023.10191711 · Cited by 6
Liu, Y., Jiang, X., Yin, Y., Wang, Y., Mi, F., Liu, Q., Wan, X., & Wang, B. (2023) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.1 · Cited by 6
Evaluating the Knowledge Dependency of Questions
Moon, H., Yang, Y., Yu, H., Lee, S., Jeong, M., Park, J., Shin, J., Kim, M., & Choi, S. L. (2022) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.718 · Cited by 8
Multi-Label Intent Detection via Contrastive Task Specialization of Sentence Encoders
Vulić, I., Casanueva, I., Spithourakis, G., Mondal, A., Wen, T.-H., & Budzianowski, P. (2022) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-main.512 · Cited by 6
Entity-level Sentiment Analysis in Contact Center Telephone Conversations
Fu, X.-Y., Chen, C., Laskar, M. T. R., Gardiner, S., Hiranandani, P., & Shashi Bhushan, T. N. (2022) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.emnlp-industry.49 · Cited by 11
de Oliveira, D., Prabhu, N. R., & Gerkmann, T. (2023) · Interspeech (USB) · doi:10.21437/interspeech.2023-1758 · Cited by 8
Pachade, S., Datta, S., Dong, Y., Salazar‐Marioni, S. A., Abdelkhaleq, R., Niktabe, A., Roberts, K. E., Sheth, S., & Giancardo, L. (2023) · IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) · doi:10.1109/isbi53787.2023.10230623 · Cited by 7
Real-time low latency estimation of brain rhythms with deep neural networks
Semenkov, I., Fedosov, N., Makarov, I., & Ossadtchi, A. E. (2023) · Journal of Neural Engineering · doi:10.1088/1741-2552/acf7f3 · Cited by 7
MiniALBERT: Model Distillation via Parameter-Efficient Recursive Transformers
Nouriborji, M., Rohanian, O., Kouchaki, S., & Clifton, D. A. (2023) · Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.eacl-main.83 · Cited by 10
Zeng, X., & Zubiaga, A. (2023) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EACL · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.findings-eacl.14 · Cited by 6
A New Generation? A Discussion on Deep Generative Models in Supply Chains
Oliveira, E. E., & Pereira, T. (2023) · IFIP advances in information and communication technology · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-43662-8_32 · Cited by 8
ActiveGLAE: A Benchmark for Deep Active Learning with Transformers
Rauch, L., Aßenmacher, M., Huseljic, D., Wirth, M., Bischl, B., & Sick, B. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-43412-9_4 · Cited by 8
The DistilBERT Model: A Promising Approach to Improve Machine Reading Comprehension Models
P, S. V., Shahapure, N. H., Rekha, P. M., Nethravathi, B., Khandelwal, P., Anand, A., Agrawal, P., & Srivastava, V. (2023) · International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication · doi:10.17762/ijritcc.v11i8.7957 · Cited by 9
Leveraging contextual representations with BiLSTM-based regressor for lexical complexity prediction
Aziz, A., Hossain, M. A., Chy, A. N., Ullah, M. Z., & Aono, M. (2023) · Natural Language Processing Journal · doi:10.1016/j.nlp.2023.100039 · Cited by 8
Ormerod, M., del Rincón, J. M., & Devereux, B. J. (2023) · Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/coli_a_00495 · Cited by 7
Template-based Approach to Zero-shot Intent Recognition
Lamanov, D., Burnyshev, P., Artemova, K., Malykh, V., Bout, A., & Piontkovskaya, I. (2022) · International Conference on Natural Language Generation · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.inlg-main.2 · Cited by 6
Maslim, M., Wang, H., Putra, C. D., & Prabowo, Y. D. (2024) · International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.9781/ijimai.2024.02.003 · Cited by 11
Matsuhira, C., Kastner, M. A., Komamizu, T., Hirayama, T., Doman, K., Kawanishi, Y., & Ide, I. (2024) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2024.3378095 · Cited by 7
Semantics of Multiword Expressions in Transformer-Based Models: A Survey
Miletić, F., & Walde, S. S. I. (2024) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00657 · Cited by 14
Synthetic Data Generation with Large Language Models for Personalized Community Question Answering
Braga, M., Kasela, P., Raganato, A., & Pasi, G. (2024) · IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT) · doi:10.1109/wi-iat62293.2024.00057 · Cited by 11
Second-Order NLP Adversarial Examples
Morris, J. X. (2020) · BlackboxNLP Workshop on Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (BlackboxNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.blackboxnlp-1.22 · Cited by 7
TransQuest: Translation Quality Estimation with Cross-lingual Transformers
Ranasinghe, T., Orǎsan, C., & Mitkov, R. (2020) · International Conference on Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.coling-main.445 · Cited by 66
Enhanced Sentence Alignment Network for Efficient Short Text Matching
Hu, Z., Fu, Z., Peng, C., & Wang, W. (2020) · Workshop on Noisy User-generated Text (W-NUT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.wnut-1.6 · Cited by 6
Correcting the Misuse: A Method for the Chinese Idiom Cloze Test
Wang, X., Zhao, H., Yang, T., & Wang, H. (2020) · Workshop on Knowledge Extraction and Integration for Deep Learning Architectures: Deep Learning Inside Out (DeeLIO) · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.deelio-1.1 · Cited by 6
Multilingual Legal Information Retrieval System for Mapping Recitals and Normative Provisions
Nanda, R., Humphreys, L., Grossio, L., et al. (2020) · Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications · doi:10.3233/faia200856 · Cited by 6
Parsing Argumentative Structure in English-as-Foreign-Language Essays.
Putra, J. W. G., Teufel, S., & Tokunaga, T. (2021) · Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · Cited by 7
Prediction of Public Trust in Politicians Using a Multimodal Fusion Approach
Syed, M. S. S., Pirogova, E., & Lech, M. (2021) · Electronics · doi:10.3390/electronics10111259 · Cited by 6
Comprehension Based Question Answering using Bloom’s Taxonomy
Sahu, P., Cogswell, M., Divakaran, A., & Rutherford-Quach, S. (2021) · Workshop on Representation Learning for NLP (RepL4NLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.repl4nlp-1.3 · Cited by 9
Evaluation of Representation Models for Text Classification with AutoML Tools
Brändle, S., Hanussek, M., Blohm, M., & Kintz, M. (2021) · Lecture notes in networks and systems · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-89880-9_24 · Cited by 6
Chop Chop BERT: Visual Question Answering by Chopping VisualBERT’s Heads
Gao, C., Zhu, Q., Wang, P., & Wu, Q. (2021) · International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.24963/ijcai.2021/92 · Cited by 7
BERT Has Uncommon Sense: Similarity Ranking for Word Sense BERTology
Gessler, L., & Schneider, N. (2021) · BlackboxNLP Workshop on Analyzing and Interpreting Neural Networks for NLP (BlackboxNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.blackboxnlp-1.43 · Cited by 6
Better Few-Shot Text Classification with Pre-trained Language Model
Chen, Z., & Zhang, Y. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-86340-1_43 · Cited by 6
Pretrained Neural Models for Turkish Text Classification
OKUR, H. İ., & Sertbaş, A. (2021) · International Conference on Computer Science and Engineering (UBMK) · doi:10.1109/ubmk52708.2021.9558878 · Cited by 6
A Comparative Study of Transformers on Word Sense Disambiguation
Chawla, A., Mulay, N., Bishnoi, V., Dhama, G., & Singh, A. K. (2021) · Communications in computer and information science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-92307-5_87 · Cited by 8
Li, T., Rashid, A., Jafari, A., Sharma, P., Ghodsi, A., & Rezagholizadeh, M. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.65 · Cited by 12
Fixed-point Quantization for Vision Transformer
Li, Z., Wang, P., Wang, Z., & Cheng, J. (2021) · China Automation Congress (CAC) · doi:10.1109/cac53003.2021.9728246 · Cited by 6
EICO: Improving Few-Shot Text Classification via Explicit and Implicit Consistency Regularization
Zhao, L., & Cheng, Y. (2022) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: ACL (Findings of ACL) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.findings-acl.283 · Cited by 6
Sex and gender bias in natural language processing
Cirillo, D., Gonen, H., Santus, E., Valencia, A., Costa‐jussà, M. R., & Villegas, M. (2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-821392-6.00009-1 · Cited by 8
Suri, M. (2022) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.semeval-1.63 · Cited by 6
Shekhawat, T. S., Kumar, M., Rathore, U., Joshi, A., & Patro, J. (2022) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.semeval-1.131 · Cited by 6
Putri, D. U. K., & Pratomo, D. N. (2022) · Inform Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Teknologi Informasi dan Komunikasi · doi:10.25139/inform.v7i2.4686 · Cited by 9
A Sample-Efficient OPF Learning Method Based on Annealing Knowledge Distillation
Dong, Z., Hou, K., Liu, Z., et al. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3207146 · Cited by 6
Shushkevich, E., Cardiff, J., & Boldyreva, A. (2023) · Conference of Open Innovations Association (FRUCT) · doi:10.23919/fruct58615.2023.10143004 · Cited by 6
FROM TEXT TO IMAGES: LINKING SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS TO IMAGES USING JOINT EMBEDDING
Chen, C., Carroll, C., & Morkos, B. W. (2023) · Proceedings of the Design Society · doi:10.1017/pds.2023.199 · Cited by 6
Cusack, H., & Bialkowski, A. (2023) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn54540.2023.10191327 · Cited by 6
Improving Generalization of Pre-trained Language Models via Stochastic Weight Averaging
Lu, P., Kobyzev, I., Rezagholizadeh, M., Rashid, A., Ghodsi, A., & Langlais, P. (2022) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.findings-emnlp.363 · Cited by 8
TFRGAN: Leveraging Text Information for Blind Face Restoration with Extreme Degradation
Xie, C., Ning, Q., Dong, W., & Shi, G. (2023) · IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) · doi:10.1109/cvprw59228.2023.00252 · Cited by 6
Extension Multi30K: Multimodal Dataset for Integrated Vision and Language Research in Ukrainian
Saichyshyna, N., Maksymenko, D., Turuta, O., et al. (2023) · doi:10.18653/v1/2023.unlp-1.7 · Cited by 6
Personality Detection on Reddit Using DistilBERT
Julianda, A. R., & Maharani, W. (2023) · Jurnal RESTI (Rekayasa Sistem dan Teknologi Informasi) · doi:10.29207/resti.v7i5.5236 · Cited by 6
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
