ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2025
The geometry of meaning: evaluating sentence embeddings from diverse transformer-based models for natural language inference.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Natural language inference (NLI) is a fundamental task in natural language processing that focuses on determining the relationship between pairs of sentences. In this article, we present a simple and straightforward approach to evaluate the effectiveness of various transformer-based models such as bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT), Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT), robustly optimized BERT approach (RoBERTa), and XLNet in generating sentence embeddings for NLI. We conduct comprehensive experiments with different pooling techniques and evaluate the embeddings using different norms across multiple layers of each model. Our results demonstrate that the choice of pooling strategy, norm, and model layer significantly impacts the performance of NLI, with the best results achieved using max pooling and the L2 norm across specific model layers. On the Stanford Natural Language Inference (SNLI) dataset, the model reached 90% accuracy and 86% F1-score, while on the MedNLI dataset, the highest F1-score recorded was 84%. This article provides insights into how different models and evaluation strategies can be effectively combined to improve the understanding and classification of sentence relationships in NLI tasks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.