arXiv Computation and Language
Sparse PPMI Graph Averaging for Random Indexing Embeddings
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
Related stories
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 7
Sparse Mutual Information Graph Averaging for Improving Random Indexing Embeddings
arXiv:2608. 05724v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Sparse word embedding pipelines can avoid dense co-occurrence matrix materialization, dense factorization, and gradient training while still relying on sparse global corpus statistics.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 6
Sparse Mutual Information Graph Averaging for Improving Random Indexing Embeddings
Sparse word embedding pipelines can avoid dense co-occurrence matrix materialization, dense factorization, and gradient training while still relying on sparse global corpus statistics. This paper studies Random Indexing (RI) vectors refined by weighted averaging on a sparse Positive Pointwise Mutual Information (PPMI) graph.
arXiv AI
Aug 5
When Should Graph Attention Be Sparse? Learning a Per-Edge Tsallis Index
arXiv:2608. 02938v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Graph attention normalizes neighborhood scores with softmax, the maximum-entropy choice under Shannon statistics.
arXiv AI
Jun 2
Consistent and Distinctive: LLM Benchmark Efficiency via Maximum Independent Set Prompt Selection on Similarity Graphs
arXiv:2606. 01400v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Evaluating large language models (LLMs) across comprehensive benchmarks is expensive and time-consuming.
arXiv AI
Jun 2
UR-JEPA: Uniform Rectifiability as a Regularizer for Joint-Embedding Predictive Architectures
arXiv:2606. 01443v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A central difficulty in training Joint-Embedding Predictive Architectures (JEPAs) is preventing representation collapse.
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 2
Are Near-Tied LLM Rankings Robust to Family-DIF-Guided Benchmark Recomposition?
The study investigates whether small differences in leaderboard rankings between large language models (LLMs) are robust to changes in benchmark composition. Using item‑level responses from five benchmarks and a spectral approximation to multidimensional item‑response theory, the authors find that while overall rankings remain highly correlated, a significant portion (30.9–47.1%) of near‑tie pairs reverse order when benchmark items are recomposed based on low differential item functioning. This suggests that sub‑one‑percentage‑point leaderboard gaps may not reliably reflect true model superiority.