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 4,101–4,200 of 4,692
On Isotropy Calibration of TransformersPreprint
Ding, Y., Martinkus, K., Pascual, D., Clematide, S., & Wattenhofer, R. P. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.13304
Interactively Generating Explanations for Transformer Language Models.Preprint
Schramowski, P., Friedrich, F., Tauchmann, C., & Kersting, K. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University)
Varghese, N., & Punithavalli, M. (2021) · International Conference on Inventive Research in Computing Applications (ICIRCA) · doi:10.1109/icirca51532.2021.9544727
Smart System to Detect Adult Content and Child Pornography on Web
Kumar, S. (2021) · International Journal for Research in Applied Science and Engineering Technology · doi:10.22214/ijraset.2021.38256
WhiteningBERT: An Easy Unsupervised Sentence Embedding ApproachPreprint
Huang, J., Tang, D., Zhong, W., Lu, S., Shou, L., Gong, M., Jiang, D., & Duan, N. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.01767 · Cited by 27
How Well Do You Know Your Audience? Reader-aware Question Generation.Preprint
Stewart, I., & Mihalcea, R. F. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University)
Bag-of-Vectors Autoencoders for Unsupervised Conditional Text GenerationPreprint
Mai, F., & Henderson, J. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.07002
Sparse Distillation: Speeding Up Text Classification by Using Bigger ModelsPreprint
Ye, Q., Khabsa, M., Lewis, M., Wang, S., Ren, X., & Jaech, A. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University)
Leveraging recent advances in Pre-Trained Language Models forEye-Tracking PredictionPreprint
Madhavan, V., Pawate, A. G., Pal, S., & Chandra, A. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.04475
Improved Goal Oriented Dialogue via Utterance Generation and Look AheadPreprint
Ben-David, E., Carmeli, B., & Anaby-Tavor, A. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.12412
Technical and Social sensor aggregation for smart environment enhancement
Charalampous, A., Παπαδόπουλος, Α., Efstathiades, C., & Katzis, K. (2021) · IEEE AFRICON · doi:10.1109/africon51333.2021.9570998
BERMo: What can BERT learn from ELMo?Preprint
Kodge, S., & Roy, K. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.15802
Wahed, M., Gruhl, D., Alba, A., Gentile, A. L., Ristoski, P., DeLuca, C., Welch, S., & Lourentzou, I. (2021) · ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM) · doi:10.1145/3459637.3481950
A Sybil Detection Method in OSN Based on DistilBERT and Double-SN-LSTM for Text Analysis
Xu, X., Dong, J., Liu, Z., et al. (2021) · Lecture notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90022-9_4
Silva, G., Ribeiro, R., & Lopes, R. J. (2021) · International Conference on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support (icSPORTS) · doi:10.5220/0010691100003059
Avoiding Inference Heuristics in Few-shot Prompt-based Finetuning
Utama, P. A., Moosavi, N. S., Sanh, V., & Gurevych, I. (2021) · White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.04144
Self-citationDynamic Knowledge Distillation for Pre-trained Language ModelsPreprint
Li, L., Lin, Y., Ren, S., Li, P., Zhou, J., & Sun, X. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.11295 · Cited by 3
Towards Zero-Shot Knowledge Distillation for Natural Language ProcessingPreprint
Rashid, A., Lioutas, V., Ghaddar, A., & Rezagholizadeh, M. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2012.15495 · Cited by 6
Knowledge Distillation with Noisy Labels for Natural Language UnderstandingPreprint
Bhardwaj, S., Ghaddar, A., Rashid, A., Bibi, K., Li, C., Ghodsi, A., Langlais, P., & Rezagholizadeh, M. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.10147 · Cited by 1
BERT Has Uncommon Sense: Similarity Ranking for Word Sense BERTologyPreprint
Gessler, L., & Schneider, N. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.09780
Low Precision Decentralized Distributed Training with Heterogeneous DataPreprint
Aketi, S. A., Kodge, S., & Roy, K. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University)
Edge-Cloud Polarization and Collaboration: A Comprehensive SurveyPreprint
Yao, J., Zhang, S., Yang, Y., Wang, F., Ma, J., Zhang, J., Chu, Y., Ji, L., Jia, K., Shen, T., et al. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University)
KnowMAN: Weakly Supervised Multinomial Adversarial NetworksPreprint
März, L., Asgari, E., Braune, F., Zimmermann, F., & Roth, B. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.07994
Perturbing Inputs for Fragile Interpretations in Deep Natural Language ProcessingPreprint
Sinha, S., Chen, H., Sekhon, A., Ji, Y., & Qi, Y. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.04990 · Cited by 18
Speeding Up Transformer Training By Using Dataset Subsampling - An Exploratory Analysis
Torbarina, L., Mihelčić, V., Šarlija, B., Roguski, Ł., & Kraljević, Ž. (2021) · Workshop on Simple and Efficient Natural Language Processing (SustaiNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.sustainlp-1.11
FLiText: A Faster and Lighter Semi-Supervised Text Classification with Convolution NetworksPreprint
Liu, C., Zhang, M., Fu, Z., Hou, P., & Yu, L. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2110.11869
Offense Detection in Dravidian Languages using Code-Mixing Index based Focal LossPreprint
Tula, D., Ms, S., Reddy, V., et al. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2111.06916
DramaCoref: A Hybrid Coreference Resolution System for German Theater Plays
Pagel, J., & Reiter, N. (2021) · Workshop on Computational Models of Reference, Anaphora and Coreference (CRAC) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.crac-1.4 · Cited by 1
Lifelong Explainer for Lifelong Learners
Situ, X., Maruf, S., Ingrid Zukerman, A., Paris, C. L., & Haffari, G. (2021) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.emnlp-main.233
Classification and Geotemporal Analysis of Quality-of-Life Issues in Tenant Reviews
Haber, A., & Waks, Z. (2021) · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP (Findings of EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.217
Consistent Accelerated Inference via Confident Adaptive TransformersPreprint
Schuster, T., Fisch, A., Jaakkola, T., & Barzilay, R. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.08803 · Cited by 7
ComboNER: A Lightweight All-In-One POS Tagger, Dependency Parser and NER
Wawer, A. (2021) · International conference Recent advances in natural language processing · doi:10.26615/978-954-452-072-4_169
Training Dynamic based data filtering may not work for NLP datasetsPreprint
Talukdar, A., Dagar, M., Gupta, P., & Menon, V. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2109.09191 · Cited by 1
Automatic Entity Labeling through Explanation Techniques (Discussion Paper).
Castano, S., Ferrara, A., Firmani, D., et al. (2021) · SEBD
Fan, J., Zhang, X., & Zhang, S. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University)
Partner Personas Generation for Diverse Dialogue GenerationPreprint
Lu, H., Lam, W. P., Cheng, H., & Meng, H. M. L. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2111.13833
Exploring Low-Cost Transformer Model Compression for Large-Scale Commercial Reply SuggestionsPreprint
Shrivastava, V., Gaonkar, R., Gupta, S., & Jha, A. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2111.13999
Token Level Evaluation and Feature Enhancer for Transformer-based Models
Mendbayar, K., & Aono, M. (2021) · International Conference on Advanced Informatics: Concepts, Theory and Applications (ICAICTA) · doi:10.1109/icaicta53211.2021.9640269 · Cited by 1
Data Mining Tool To Help The Scientific Community Develop Answers To Covid-19 Queries
Rajath, S., Kumar, A., Agarwal, M., shekar, S. N. C., & Prasad, V. B. (2021) · International Conference on Intelligent Computing in Data Sciences (ICDS) · doi:10.1109/icds53782.2021.9626771 · Cited by 1
Sentimental Tweets Classification of Symptomatic COVID-19Preprint
Tharun, P. (2021) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2021.12.15.472745
CATAQ: Concise Answer to any Question
Ghoshal, A., Kamath, R., & Uma, D. (2021) · International Conference on Innovative Computing, Intelligent Communication and Smart Electrical Systems (ICSES) · doi:10.1109/icses52305.2021.9633951
Peer Review #2 of "Knowledge distillation in deep learning and its applications (v0.1)"
(2021) · PeerJ Computer Science · doi:10.7287/peerj-cs.474v0.1/reviews/2
Peer Review #1 of "Knowledge distillation in deep learning and its applications (v0.1)"
(2021) · PeerJ Computer Science · doi:10.7287/peerj-cs.474v0.1/reviews/1
Designing An Information Framework For Semantic Search
Parlak, İ. B. (2022) · European Journal of Science and Technology · doi:10.31590/ejosat.1043441
CLUSTERING VIETNAMESE CONVERSATIONS FROM FACEBOOK PAGE TO BUILD TRAINING DATASET FOR CHATBOT
Nguyen, T. H., Pham, T.-K.-N., Bui, T.-H.-M., & Nguyen, T.-Q.-C. (2022) · Jordanian Journal of Computers and Information Technology · doi:10.5455/jjcit.71-1632557439 · Cited by 3
Peer Review #1 of "Knowledge distillation in deep learning and its applications (v0.2)"
(2021) · PeerJ Computer Science · doi:10.7287/peerj-cs.474v0.2/reviews/1
ANALIZA RAZLIČITIH MODELA ZA PREPOZNAVANJE IMENOVANIH ENTITETA NA SRPSKOM JEZIKU
Cvejić, A. (2022) · Zbornik radova Fakulteta tehničkih nauka u Novom Sadu · doi:10.24867/16be40cvejic
SISTEM ZA ODGOVORE NA PITANJA U DOMENU FITNESA ZASNOVAN NA MAŠINSKOM UČENJU
Katic, S. (2022) · Zbornik radova Fakulteta tehničkih nauka u Novom Sadu · doi:10.24867/16be05katic
Part-of-Speech Models Compression Methods for on-Device Grapheme-to-Phoneme Conversion
Kubis, M., Méloux, M., Skórzewski, P., Lewandowski, M., Jho, G., & Park, H.-M. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/icassp43922.2022.9746710
Combining Minimal Surface Model with DGCNN for Natural Language Understanding
Zha, M., Lin, G., Fu, H., Liu, Y., & Huang, L. (2021) · 2021 2nd International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Information Technology (CECIT) · doi:10.1109/cecit53797.2021.00078
FasterBERT with Double Loss Function Based on Batch Data Preprocessing
Duan, P., Lu, J., & Zheng, Y. (2021) · 2021 2nd International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Information Technology (CECIT) · doi:10.1109/cecit53797.2021.00109
Cross-Modal Relation-Aware Networks for Fake News Detection
Hui, Y., & Wang, J. (2022) · Journal of New Media · doi:10.32604/jnm.2022.027312
Analyzing the usage of source texts in new documents
MacLaughlin, A. (2021) · Digital Repository Service (Northeastern University) · doi:10.17760/d20406226
Text Classification for Marketing Research Using Pre-Trained General Language ModelsPreprint
Dornekott, D. (2021) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3932205
Developing natural language processing instruments to study sociotechnical systemsPreprint
Lab, S. (2021) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/zrbd4
Gender Bias in Occupation Classification from the New York Times Obituaries
Atik, C., & Tekır, S. (2022) · Deu Muhendislik Fakultesi Fen ve Muhendislik · doi:10.21205/deufmd.2022247109
Classificação de personalidade a partir de textos segundo a Tipologia de Myers-Briggs
dos Santos, V. G. (2021) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/d.100.2021.tde-18102021-175342
Fast and Light-Weight Answer Text Retrieval in Dialogue Systems
Wan, H., Patel, S. S., Murdock, J. W., Potdar, S., & Joshi, S. (2022) · Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL-HLT) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.naacl-industry.37 · Cited by 1
Gender Classification from Tweets Using LSTMs and Transformers
Alaaeldein, O. (2022) · International Mobile, Intelligent, and Ubiquitous Computing Conference (MIUCC) · doi:10.1109/miucc55081.2022.9781702
Sethi, A., Gond, A. K., Singh, A. K., & Shambharkar, P. G. (2022) · International Conference on Applied Artificial Intelligence and Computing (ICAAIC) · doi:10.1109/icaaic53929.2022.9793209
Graph Attention Neural Network Distributed Model Training
Esmaeilzadeh, A., Kambar, M. E. Z. N., & Heidari, M. (2022) · IEEE World AI IoT Congress (AIIoT) · doi:10.1109/aiiot54504.2022.9817156
DKBERT: An Efficient and Effective Ranking Model via Weight Sharing Decoupling and Kernel Matching
Li, X., & Li, D. (2022) · International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Big Data (ICAIBD) · doi:10.1109/icaibd55127.2022.9820107
Unsupervised Quality Estimation via Multilingual Denoising Autoencoder
Nishihara, T., Iwamoto, Y., Yoshinaka, M., Kajiwara, T., Arase, Y., & Ninomiya, T. (2022) · Journal of Natural Language Processing · doi:10.5715/jnlp.29.669
Distilling Salient Reviews with Zero Labels
Huang, C.-Y., Li, J., Bhutani, N., Whedon, A., Junior, E. R. H., & Suhara, Y. (2022) · Fact Extraction and VERification Workshop (FEVER) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.fever-1.3
Data Quality Estimation Framework for Faster Tax Code Classification
Kondadadi, R., Williams, A., & Nicolov, N. (2022) · Workshop on e-Commerce and NLP (ECNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.ecnlp-1.4
Analyzing Major Indian Protests using Nature Inspired Algorithms
Kumar, M., Badola, M., Sweety, N., & Vishwakarma, D. K. (2022) · International Conference for Emerging Technology (INCET) · doi:10.1109/incet54531.2022.9824759
Felix&Julia at SemEval-2022 Task 4: Patronizing and Condescending Language Detection
Herrmann, F., & Krebs, J. (2022) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.semeval-1.46
Adaikkan, K., & Thenmozhi, D. (2022) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.semeval-1.53
Dumitrascu, T., Gînga, R.-A., Dobre, B., & Sielecki, B. R. S. (2022) · International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval) · doi:10.18653/v1/2022.semeval-1.70
Filho, I. J. D. R., Trindade, R. N. T., Martins, L. H. D., et al. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1972623/v1
A Study on the Best Way to Compress Natural Language Processing Models
Antunes, J., Pardal, M. L., & Coheur, L. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE) · doi:10.1109/fuzz-ieee55066.2022.9882595
TCS Framework: Generating Text Summaries of Specified Style Using Classifier and Summarizer
Yang, X., Wang, Y., & Li, X. (2022) · 2022 4th International Conference on Natural Language Processing (ICNLP) · doi:10.1109/icnlp55136.2022.00075
Pirozelli, P., José Marcos, M., Igor, S., Cação, F. N., Peres, S. M., Brandão, A. A. F., R., C. A. H., & Cozman, F. G. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2046889/v1
Community Question Answering Ranking: Methodology Survey
Zaazaa, A., Rashwan, M., & Emam, O. (2022) · The Egyptian Journal of Language Engineering /The Egyptian Journal of Language Engineering · doi:10.21608/ejle.2022.138720.1031
Hybrid Architecture Based Intelligent Diagnosis Assistant for GPPreprint
Wang, R., Jayathunge, K., Page, R. A., et al. (2022) · doi:10.22541/au.166741827.78885041/v1
(2022) · Linköping electronic conference proceedings · doi:10.3384/ecp190
DSTP: Depression and suicidal ideation prediction using social media data
Dhasmana, G., Gujjar, A., & Sharma, M. K. (2022) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/5.0105936 · Cited by 1
Hierarchical Cache Transformer: Dynamic Early Exit for Language Translation
Tsai, C.-S., Chan, Y.-H., & Fan, Y.-C. (2022) · International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) · doi:10.1109/ijcnn55064.2022.9891931
Data Security Search Based on Semi-Supervised Sensitive Classifier
Jiao, S., Zhang, S., Gao, F., & Wang, T. (2022) · International Conference on Data Intelligence and Security (ICDIS) · doi:10.1109/icdis55630.2022.00033
Barbon, R. S., & Akabane, A. T. (2022) · Simpósio Brasileiro de Redes de Computadores e Sistemas Distribuídos (SBRC) · doi:10.5753/sbrc_estendido.2022.223391
Opinion mining on product reviews from document to clause
Ting, L. (2022) · DR-NTU (Nanyang Technological University) · doi:10.32657/10356/163981
REDIT: Resilient Distributed Text-to-Speech at Edge Networks
Li, T., Seferoğlu, H., & Koyuncu, E. (2022) · Globecom · doi:10.1109/globecom48099.2022.10001480
Academic Graph: A Literature Review System
Çataltaş, M., Yumuşak, S., & Öztoprak, K. (2022) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata55660.2022.10020376
Phuc, D. T., Nghiem, D. V., Minh, B. B., Linh, T. M., & Hieu, D. S. (2023) · International Journal of Power Electronics and Drive Systems/International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · doi:10.11591/ijece.v13i3.pp3311-3321 · Cited by 2
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
