REVIEW 4 cited by
Pooling And Attention: What Are Effective Designs For LLM-Based Embedding Models?
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
The significant advancements of Large Language Models (LLMs) in generative tasks have led to a growing body of work exploring LLM-based embedding models. While these models, employing different pooling and attention strategies, have achieved state-of-the-art performance on public embedding benchmarks, questions still arise about what constitutes an effective design for LLM-based embedding models. However, these models are often trained on different datasets, using different LLM base models or training settings. Moreover, evaluations on public embedding benchmarks often fail to report statistical significance, making it difficult to determine which designs truly contribute to final performance. This complicates the process for practitioners seeking optimal training recipes for LLM-based embedding models. In this study, we conduct a large-scale experiment by training a series of LLM-based embedding models using the same training data and base model but differing in their pooling and attention strategies. The results show that there is no one-size-fits-all solution: while bidirectional attention and an additional trainable pooling layer outperform in text similarity and information retrieval tasks, they do not significantly surpass simpler designs like EOS-last token pooling and default causal attention in clustering and classification tasks. Furthermore, we propose a new pooling strategy, Multi-Layers Trainable Pooling, which transforms the outputs of all hidden layers, rather than just the last layer, using a cross-attention network. This method proves to be statistically superior in text similarity and retrieval tasks compared to existing pooling methods. Overall, this paper sheds light on effective training strategies for LLM-based embedding models.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
The SuperActivator Mechanism: Transformers Concentrate Reliable Concept Signals in the Tail
Reliable concept presence in transformers is concentrated in the extreme high-activation tail of in-concept tokens; thresholding that tail improves concept detection and localization.
-
IMFuse: Instance-Aware Multi-Layer Fusion for LLM-Enhanced Sequential Recommendation
Instance-aware multi-layer fusion of frozen LLM item embeddings improves sequential recommenders by ~6.7% relative over final-layer and generic multi-layer baselines.
-
Training-Free versus Training-Based Intent Classification in LLMs: Accuracy, Robustness, and Failure Modes
Statistical classifiers built on LLM activation norms and coordinates match or beat trained MLP heads on coarse intent routing and resist camouflage better, while MLPs win on fine-grained subfield distinctions.
-
Xray-Visual Models: Scaling Vision models on Industry Scale Data
A 2-billion-parameter vision encoder trained on 15B+ image-text and billions of video-hashtag pairs reports SOTA ImageNet linear-probe, Kinetics, and retrieval numbers, but relies on proprietary data and has several v...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.