Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 41 references

Transformer-Based Contextualized Language Models Joint with Neural Networks for Natural Language Inference in Vietnamese

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Freezing a large language model and adding a small neural network matches full fine-tuning for Vietnamese natural language inference.

desk verdict Empirical sweep is useful reference, but the abstract's superiority claim fails against the paper's own Table 3 and Section 5. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13407 v2 pith:AKJ3JDRS submitted 2024-11-20 cs.CL

Dat Van-Thanh Nguyen , Tin Van Huynh , Kiet Van Nguyen , Ngan Luu-Thuy Nguyen This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CL
keywords TransformerContextualizedLanguageModelNeuralNetworkNaturalInferenceVietnameseViNLIPhoBERTXLM-R
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that Vietnamese natural language inference can be handled well by a cheap joint architecture: freeze a transformer-based contextualized language model (PhoBERT, mBERT, XLM-R, or InfoXLM), take its last hidden layer as a contextual embedding of the premise–hypothesis pair, and let a small CNN or BiLSTM classify. On the ViNLI benchmark the best configuration, XLM-R with a CNN, reaches 82.78% F1 on the three-label test set, which the authors report as higher than the fine-tuned PhoBERT, mBERT, and XLM-R baselines. Most joint models land within roughly ±2.3% of those baselines, so the advantage is concentrated in the best configuration. The paper also shows contextualized embeddings beat static word vectors by a wide margin, and that one-shot ChatGPT performs far worse. If correct, the finding matters because it offers an efficient alternative to expensive full fine-tuning for languages with scarce resources.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the frozen CLM plus neural classifier pipeline. The CLM produces a sequence of contextualized vectors for the [CLS]-prefixed, [SEP]-separated premise–hypothesis input; the last hidden layer is converted to a fixed 1024-dimension representation and fed either to a CNN (convolution, ReLU, max-pooling, one branch per label) or to a two-layer BiLSTM. The CNN's sliding window extracts features from the matrix-form CLM output, which the paper says explains its consistent edge over BiLSTM in these experiments.

What would settle it

Re-run the fine-tuned baselines (PhoBERT, mBERT, XLM-R) on the same ViNLI splits with the same tokenization, learning rate 1e-5, and evaluation metric, and compare three-label test F1; if fine-tuned XLM-R reaches or exceeds 82.78% F1, the claimed advantage of the frozen joint model disappears.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a frozen encoder plus a task-specific neural classifier is a strong recipe for Vietnamese NLI. After concatenating premise and hypothesis with [CLS] and [SEP], the authors feed the pair through the CLM at its maximum input length—no truncation—and pass the last hidden layer through a linear layer to a fixed 1024-dimensional space, followed by a CNN with four per-label branches (or a two-layer BiLSTM); the branch outputs are concatenated, dropped out, and linearly projected to label logits. The best result, 82.78% F1 (three-label test) with XLM-R + CNN, exceeds the fine-tuned PhoBERT, mBERT, and XLM-R numbers reported in [12]. The authors read this as evidence that the joint approach captures the contextual understanding of large models without updating their weights.

Load-bearing premise

The claimed superiority over fine-tuning assumes that the fine-tuned baseline numbers taken from [12] were produced under conditions comparable to the authors' own runs—same data splits, tokenization, and training settings—because those baselines were not re-run in this study.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The best joint model, XLM-R combined with CNN, achieves 82.78% F1 on the three-label ViNLI test set, higher than the fine-tuned PhoBERT, mBERT, and XLM-R baselines reported in [12].
  • Contextualized embeddings from CLMs outperform static word vectors (word2vecVN, fasttext, w2v_cc_300d) by roughly a factor of two in accuracy, so vector-space inputs are a poor choice for Vietnamese NLI.
  • CNN heads generally beat BiLSTM heads across CLM embeddings, indicating the matrix-form CLM output favors convolutional feature extraction over recurrent sequence modeling.
  • One-shot ChatGPT reaches only about half the F1 of the joint models, suggesting Vietnamese NLI is still hard for few-shot generative inference.
  • Since only the small classifier is trained, joint models cut memory needs compared with fine-tuning large encoders, supporting applications with limited GPU resources.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the pattern transfers to other low-resource languages, freezing a large multilingual encoder and training only a small head could become a default efficient recipe for NLI when labeled data and GPU memory are scarce.
  • The reported gaps (e.g., +0.94% F1 over XLM-R) are within the range that could flip across random seeds; variance estimates and significance tests would be needed to confirm the advantage is real.
  • The per-label and per-topic error analyses are model-specific, so ensembling joint models built on different CLMs could push accuracy beyond any single configuration.
  • Because the encoder is frozen, the approach is compatible with distillation or data augmentation on the small head, which the paper only names as future work.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a joint architecture for Vietnamese natural language inference (NLI) in which a frozen or lightly trained transformer-based contextualized language model (PhoBERT, XLM-R, mBERT, or InfoXLM) produces sentence-pair representations that are then classified by a CNN or BiLSTM. On the ViNLI dataset, the authors report a best three-label test F1 of 82.78% for XLM-R with a CNN, compare against the fine-tuned baselines of Huynh et al. (2022), and also compare with non-contextualized word embeddings and a one-shot ChatGPT baseline. The paper claims in the abstract that the joint approach 'consistently demonstrated superior performance' over fine-tuned PhoBERT, mBERT, and XLM-R by margins of +6.58%, +19.08%, and +0.94% F1, respectively.

Significance. If the central claim were supported, the paper would offer a practically useful result: a lightweight classifier on contextualized embeddings can match or exceed full fine-tuning of strong multilingual language models for Vietnamese NLI, at lower computational cost. The paper also contains useful descriptive material, including per-label and per-topic accuracy breakdowns, confusion matrices, and a comparison between contextualized and non-contextualized embeddings. However, the headline superiority claim is contradicted by the paper's own results and by its own statement in Section 5, and the baseline comparisons are not controlled experiments. The empirical contribution is therefore not yet established at the level required for publication.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 5, Table 3] The central claim of consistent superiority is not supported by the paper's own data. The abstract reports gains of +6.58%, +19.08%, and +0.94% F1 over PhoBERT, mBERT, and XLM-R, but Table 3 shows that the best joint model (XLM-R + CNN, three-label test) exceeds the Huynh et al. baselines by 6.91, 17.95, and 1.47 F1 points, respectively. These margins match no consistent pairing in the table. More importantly, same-CLM comparisons are mixed: on the three-label test set, PhoBERT-CNN improves by only 0.08 F1, XLM-R-CNN by 1.47, and mBERT-CNN is worse by 0.91; on the four-label test set, XLM-R-CNN and mBERT-CNN are both worse than the corresponding baselines. Section 5 explicitly states that 'this approach does not outperform the previous experiment.' The abstract and Section 5 must be reconciled, and the claim of consistent superiority should be removed or substantially qualified.
  2. [Section 4.3, Table 3] The baselines in Table 3 are taken from Huynh et al. (2022) and were not rerun in the authors' own pipeline. The authors do not report whether the train/dev/test splits, tokenization, preprocessing (including VnCoreNLP segmentation), training hyperparameters, or evaluation scripts match those of Huynh et al. Differences below 1 F1 point, such as the 0.08-point improvement of PhoBERT-CNN over PhoBERT, are within the range one would expect from implementation differences or random seed variation. Without identical conditions or multiple runs with variance estimates, any claimed improvement over the baselines is not attributable to the joint architecture.
  3. [Section 4.3, Equations (1)-(4)] The metric definitions in Equations (1)-(4) define Accuracy, Precision_M, Recall_M, and F1_M over i in {1, 2, 3}, stated to correspond to entailment, contradiction, and neutral. Yet Table 3 reports results for both three-label and four-label settings. For the four-label setting, either the 'Other' class is included without a corresponding definition, or the metrics are computed over only three labels while the model was trained on four labels. The paper must state explicitly how the macro-average is computed for four labels. If the equations are used as written for four-label results, those results are not correctly defined.
  4. [Section 5, ChatGPT comparison and Table 5] The comparison with ChatGPT is based on only 100 randomly sampled test pairs, but the paper does not report any variance or confidence interval for the ChatGPT accuracies and F1 scores. Given the small sample size, a difference of 0.42 vs. 0.80 accuracy has a wide uncertainty interval, and the claim that Vietnamese NLI is 'a tricky task' for one-shot learning should be stated accordingly. Additionally, Table 5 reports F1 values for ChatGPT and the joint models but the number of labels and the exact prompting protocol are only partially described in the appendix; the appendix prompt also lists 'neutral' twice instead of the three label alternatives intended. These issues should be corrected before the comparison is used as evidence.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'contextualized work presentations' is likely a mistranslation of 'contextualized word representations' and should be corrected.
  2. [Section 3.2] The sentence 'This approach was first suggested by Sennrich et al. in their research on sentence summarization with neural attention models' misattributes a paper on subword translation to sentence summarization; the reference to Sennrich et al. (2016) is the correct type of work, but the description should be fixed.
  3. [References] Reference [36] for word2vecVN points to VnCoreNLP (Vu et al., 2018), which is duplicated from reference [31]; the correct source for the word2vecVN embeddings should be found and cited.
  4. [Figure 3] The caption 'Three Image Sequences' in Figure 3 is unhelpful; the subfigures should be individually described or the caption should state that they are confusion matrices for the three selected models.
  5. [Section 4.2] The statement 'we have to check with or without dropout, and the results that should have dropout that can increase 0.4 to 0.5 in accuracy' is grammatically unclear; please state the dropout values tested, the selected value for each model, and the direction of the effect.
  6. [Appendix 7] The Vietnamese ChatGPT prompt contains an error in the label list: it says 'trung lập' twice and omits 'mâu thuẫn' (contradiction); the English translation repeats 'neutral' and omits 'contradiction'. This affects the validity of the ChatGPT evaluation if the model received the incorrect prompt.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the work is an empirical benchmark study; the only self-citation is the reuse of the authors' prior ViNLI baseline numbers, which does not make the comparison circular, and Section 5 explicitly concedes the joint approach does not outperform the prior experiment.

full rationale

The paper contains no derivation whose output reduces to its inputs. The joint CLM+CNN/BiLSTM models are trained and evaluated on the ViNLI test set, and the reported F1 scores are measured outcomes, not quantities defined in terms of the baselines. The only self-citation of note is Table 3's reuse of Huynh et al. (2022) fine-tuning numbers for PhoBERT, XLM-R, and mBERT; because those numbers are external benchmark results rather than parameters fitted inside this paper, the comparison does not force the result by construction. Moreover, Section 5 states 'this approach does not outperform the previous experiment,' which directly contradicts the abstract's superiority claim; that is an internal-consistency/correctness defect, not a circularity defect. The abstract's percentage gains also cannot be reproduced from Table 3 (e.g., +6.58% and +0.94% match dev-set deltas, while +19.08% matches no reported delta), but again this is a reporting inconsistency. No self-definitional, fitted-input, uniqueness-importation, or ansatz-smuggling pattern is present. Score 2 reflects only the minor presence of self-cited baselines in the comparison, which is not load-bearing and does not make the central claim circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on standard pretrained encoders, the ViNLI dataset, and a handful of tuned hyperparameters. No new entities are introduced. The main concerns are the unspecified hyperparameters and the unstated assumption that frozen CLM embeddings are sufficient for the task.

free parameters (6)
  • learning_rate = 1e-5
    Tuned to be optimal for all combined models (Section 4.2); fitted to dev set.
  • hidden_dim (BiLSTM) = 1024
    Chosen to match BERT embedding size (Section 4.2).
  • dropout = 0.1
    Tuned; authors state dropout improves accuracy by 0.4-0.5 (Section 4.2).
  • batch_size = 64 (32 for XLM-R+BiLSTM)
    Set based on model memory constraints (Section 4.2).
  • CNN window sizes = unspecified
    The CNN design mentions different windows but does not specify sizes or counts (Section 3.4).
  • number_of_epochs = unspecified
    Number of training epochs is not stated (Section 4.2).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Pretrained CLMs provide useful feature representations for Vietnamese NLI without fine-tuning.
    The entire method relies on fixed CLM embeddings being informative; the paper does not fine-tune the CLMs (Section 3.3 and 3.1).
  • domain assumption The ViNLI dataset annotations are correct and reliable.
    The dataset is used as ground truth without independent quality analysis (Section 4.1).
  • domain assumption VnCoreNLP word segmentation improves PhoBERT input quality.
    They follow prior work's recommendation (Section 3.2).
  • standard math Standard neural network training mathematics (backpropagation, optimization) is valid.
    Implicit in all deep learning experiments; not questioned by the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Transformer-Based Contextualized Language Models Joint with Neural Networks for Natural Language Inference in Vietnamese." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AKJ3JDRS

@misc{pith2026241113407,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Transformer-Based Contextualized Language Models Joint with Neural Networks for Natural Language Inference in Vietnamese},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AKJ3JDRS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13407}
}
read the original abstract

Natural Language Inference (NLI) is a task within Natural Language Processing (NLP) that holds value for various AI applications. However, there have been limited studies on Natural Language Inference in Vietnamese that explore the concept of joint models. Therefore, we conducted experiments using various combinations of contextualized language models (CLM) and neural networks. We use CLM to create contextualized work presentations and use Neural Networks for classification. Furthermore, we have evaluated the strengths and weaknesses of each joint model and identified the model failure points in the Vietnamese context. The highest F1 score in this experiment, up to 82.78% in the benchmark dataset (ViNLI). By conducting experiments with various models, the most considerable size of the CLM is XLM-R (355M). That combination has consistently demonstrated superior performance compared to fine-tuning strong pre-trained language models like PhoBERT (+6.58%), mBERT (+19.08%), and XLM-R (+0.94%) in terms of F1-score. This article aims to introduce a novel approach or model that attains improved performance for Vietnamese NLI. Overall, we find that the joint approach of CLM and neural networks is simple yet capable of achieving high-quality performance, which makes it suitable for applications that require efficient resource utilization.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    VNU Journal of Science: Computer Science and Communication Engineering38 (2022)

    Ngô, Q., Hoang, A., Nguyen, H., Nguyen, L.: Vlsp 2021 - vnnli challenge: Vietnamese and english-vietnamese textual entailment. VNU Journal of Science: Computer Science and Communication Engineering38 (2022). https://doi.org/10.25073/2588-1086/vnucsce.363

    work page doi:10.25073/2588-1086/vnucsce.363 2022

  2. [2]

    VNU Journal of Science: Computer Science and Communication Engineering38 (2022)

    Duong, Q.-L.: The vnnli - vlsp 2021: Leveraging contextual word embed- ding for nli task on bilingual dataset. VNU Journal of Science: Computer Science and Communication Engineering38 (2022). https://doi.org/10.2 5073/2588-1086/vnucsce.317

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    VNU Journal of Science: Computer Science and Communication Engineering 38(2) (2022)

    Luan, N.D., Kien, N.L.H., Van Thin, D., Hao, D.N., Ngan, N.L.T.: vnnli- vlsp2021: An empirical study on vietnamese-english natural language inference based on pretrained language models with data augmenta- tion. VNU Journal of Science: Computer Science and Communication Engineering 38(2) (2022)

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    VNU Journal of Science: Computer Science and Communication Engineering38 (2022)

    Van, T., Hao, D., Nguyễn, N., Ngô, L., Ngô, K.: vnnli - vlsp2021: An empirical study on vietnamese-english natural language inference based on pretrained language models with data augmentation. VNU Journal of Science: Computer Science and Communication Engineering38 (2022). https://doi.org/10.25073/2588-1086/vnucsce.330 Springer Nature 2021 LATEX template...

    work page doi:10.25073/2588-1086/vnucsce.330 2022

  5. [5]

    Natural Language Engineering 25, 1–26 (2019)

    Martinc, M., Pollak, S.: Combining n-grams and deep convolutional fea- tures for language variety classification. Natural Language Engineering 25, 1–26 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324919000299

    work page doi:10.1017/s1351324919000299 2019

  6. [6]

    In: The Semantic Web: 15th International Conference, ESWC 2018, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, June 3–7, 2018, Proceedings 15, pp

    Zhang, Z., Robinson, D., Tepper, J.: Detecting hate speech on twitter using a convolution-gru based deep neural network. In: The Semantic Web: 15th International Conference, ESWC 2018, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, June 3–7, 2018, Proceedings 15, pp. 745–760 (2018). Springer

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Hate Speech Detection on Vietnamese Social Media Text using the Bi-GRU-LSTM-CNN Model

    Van Huynh, T., Nguyen, V.D., Van Nguyen, K., Nguyen, N.L.-T., Nguyen, A.G.-T.: Hate speech detection on vietnamese social media text using the bi-gru-lstm-cnn model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.03644 (2019)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Procedia Computer Science 135, 425–432 (2018)

    Gunawan, W., Suhartono, D., Purnomo, F., Ongko, A.: Named-entity recognition for indonesian language using bidirectional lstm-cnns. Procedia Computer Science 135, 425–432 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs. 2018.08.193

    doi:10.1016/j.procs 2018

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Huang, Z., Xu, W., Yu, K.: Bidirectional lstm-crf models for sequence tagging (2015)

    2015

  2. [10]

    In: 2020 Rivf International Conference on Computing and Communication Technologies (rivf), pp

    Van Huynh, T., Van Nguyen, K., Nguyen, N.L.-T., Nguyen, A.G.-T.: Job prediction: From deep neural network models to applications. In: 2020 Rivf International Conference on Computing and Communication Technologies (rivf), pp. 1–6 (2020). IEEE

    2020

  3. [11]

    Advances in neural information processing systems2 (1989)

    LeCun, Y., Boser, B., Denker, J., Henderson, D., Hubbard, W., Jackel, L.: Handwritten digit recognition with a back-propagation network. Advances in neural information processing systems2 (1989)

    1989

  4. [12]

    In: Proceed- ings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp

    Van Huynh, T., Van Nguyen, K., Nguyen, N.L.-T.: Vinli: a vietnamese corpus for studies on open-domain natural language inference. In: Proceed- ings of the 29th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 3858–3872 (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp

    Levesque, H.J., Davis, E., Morgenstern, L.: The winograd schema challenge. In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 552–561 (2012)

    2012

  6. [14]

    In: Machine Learning Challenges Workshop, pp

    Dagan, I., Glickman, O., Magnini, B.: The pascal recognising textual entailment challenge. In: Machine Learning Challenges Workshop, pp. 177–190 (2005). Springer

    2005

  7. [15]

    Marelli, M., Bentivogli, L., Baroni, M., Bernardi, R., Menini, S., Zampar- elli, R.: Semeval-2014 task 1: Evaluation of compositional distributional semantic models on full sentences through semantic relatedness and tex- tual entailment. In: Proceedings of the 8th Internationa...

    2014

  8. [16]

    In: Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2015, pp

    Bowman, S.R., Angeli, G., Potts, C., Manning, C.D.: A large annotated corpus for learning natural language inference. In: Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP 2015, pp. 632–642 (2015). Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL)

    2015

  9. [17]

    In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol

    Khot, T., Sabharwal, A., Clark, P.: Scitail: A textual entailment dataset from science question answering. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 32 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    In: Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers), pp

    Williams, A., Nangia, N., Bowman, S.: A broad-coverage challenge corpus for sentence understanding through inference. In: Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (L...

    2018

  11. [19]

    International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics (2023)

    Nguyen, K., Do, P., Nguyen, N., Nguyen, A., Nguyen, N.: Multi-stage trans- fer learning with bertology-based language models for question answering system in vietnamese. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-022-01735-z

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    In: Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020, pp

    Nguyen, D.Q., Nguyen, A.T.: Phobert: Pre-trained language models for vietnamese. In: Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2020, pp. 1037–1042 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    In: Proceedings of naacL-HLT, vol

    Kenton, J.D.M.-W.C., Toutanova, L.K.: Bert: Pre-training of deep bidi- rectional transformers for language understanding. In: Proceedings of naacL-HLT, vol. 1, p. 2 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    In: Guyon, I., von Luxburg, U., Bengio, S., Wallach, H.M., Fergus, R., Vish- wanathan, S.V.N., Garnett, R

    Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A.N., Kaiser, L., Polosukhin, I.: Attention is all you need. In: Guyon, I., von Luxburg, U., Bengio, S., Wallach, H.M., Fergus, R., Vish- wanathan, S.V.N., Garnett, R. (eds.) Advances in Neural Information ...

    2017

  15. [23]

    In: Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp

    Rajpurkar,P.,Zhang,J.,Lopyrev,K.,Liang,P.:Squad:100,000+questions for machine comprehension of text. In: Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 2383–2392 (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    Advances in neural information processing Springer Nature 2021 LATEX template 24 Transformer-Based CLM Joint with Neural Networks for Vietnamese NLI systems 33, 1877–1901 (2020)

    Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J.D., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A.,et al.: Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing Springer Nature 2021 LATEX template 24 Transformer-Based CLM Joi...

    2020

  17. [25]

    Hagan, M.T., Demuth, H.B., Beale, M.H.: Neural network design. (1995)

    1995

  18. [26]

    Environmen- tal Science and Pollution Research28 (2021)

    Sharifi, A., Ahmadi, M., Ala, A.: The impact of artificial intelligence and digital style on industry and energy post-covid-19 pandemic. Environmen- tal Science and Pollution Research28 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s1 1356-021-15292-5

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    Atmospheric environ- ment 32(14-15), 2627–2636 (1998)

    Dorling, S.: Artificial neural networks (the multilayer perceptron)—a review of applications in the atmospheric sciences. Atmospheric environ- ment 32(14-15), 2627–2636 (1998)

    1998

  20. [28]

    IEEE transactions on Power Systems6(2), 442–449 (1991)

    Park, D.C., El-Sharkawi, M., Marks, R., Atlas, L., Damborg, M.: Electric load forecasting using an artificial neural network. IEEE transactions on Power Systems6(2), 442–449 (1991)

    1991

  21. [29]

    Iranian Journal of Energy23(2), 71–91 (2020)

    Fani, M., Norouzi, N.: Using social and economic indicators for modeling, sensitivity analysis and forecasting the gasoline demand in the transporta- tion sector: an ann approach in case study for tehran metropolis. Iranian Journal of Energy23(2), 71–91 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp

    Sennrich, R., Haddow, B., Birch, A.: Neural machine translation of rare words with subword units. In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pp. 1715–1725. Association for Computational Linguis- tics, Be...

    2016 doi

  23. [32]

    In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp

    Conneau, A., Khandelwal, K., Goyal, N., Chaudhary, V., Wenzek, G., Guzmán, F., Grave, É., Ott, M., Zettlemoyer, L., Stoyanov, V.: Unsuper- vised cross-lingual representation learning at scale. In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Ling...

    2020

  24. [33]

    In: Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, pp

    Chi, Z., Dong, L., Wei, F., Yang, N., Singhal, S., Wang, W., Song, X., Mao, X.-L., Huang, H.-Y., Zhou, M.: Infoxlm: An information-theoretic framework for cross-lingual language model pre-training. In: Proceedings of the 2021 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Ass...

    2021

  25. [34]

    Neural Networks 18(5-6), 602–610 (2005)

    Graves, A., Schmidhuber, J.: Framewise phoneme classification with bidi- rectional LSTM and other neural network architectures. Neural Networks 18(5-6), 602–610 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2005.06.042

    2005 doi

  26. [35]

    In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018) (2018)

    Grave, E., Bojanowski, P., Gupta, P., Joulin, A., Mikolov, T.: Learning word vectors for 157 languages. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018) (2018)

    2018

  27. [36]

    In: Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Demonstrations, pp

    Vu, T., Nguyen, D.Q., Nguyen, D.Q., Dras, M., Johnson, M.: VnCoreNLP: A Vietnamese natural language processing toolkit. In: Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Demonstrations, pp. 56–60. Association...

    2018 doi

  28. [37]

    Neural Comput

    Tran, K.Q., Nguyen, A.T., Hoang, P.G., Luu, C.D., Do, T., Nguyen, K.V.: Vietnamese hate and offensive detection using phobert-cnn and social media streaming data. Neural Comput. Appl.35(1), 573–594 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-022-07745-w

    2023 doi

  29. [38]

    Advances in neural information processing systems 33, 1877–1901 (2020)

    Brown, T., Mann, B., Ryder, N., Subbiah, M., Kaplan, J.D., Dhariwal, P., Neelakantan, A., Shyam, P., Sastry, G., Askell, A.,et al.: Language models are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems 33, 1877–1901 (2020)

    2020

  30. [39]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15882 (2024)

    Do, P.N.-T., Tran, S.Q., Hoang, P.G., Van Nguyen, K., Nguyen, N.L.-T.: Vlue:Anewbenchmarkandmulti-taskknowledgetransferlearningforviet- namese natural language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.15882 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Journal of machine learning research 21(140), 1–67 (2020)

    Raffel, C., Shazeer, N., Roberts, A., Lee, K., Narang, S., Matena, M., Zhou, Y., Li, W., Liu, P.J.: Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of machine learning research 21(140), 1–67 (2020)

    2020

  32. [41]

    OpenAI blog1(8), 9 (2019)

    Radford, A., Wu, J., Child, R., Luan, D., Amodei, D., Sutskever, I.,et al.: Language models are unsupervised multitask learners. OpenAI blog1(8), 9 (2019)

    2019

  33. [42]

    Tôi muốn bạn hóa thân thành chuyên gia suy luận ngữ ngôn tiếng việt. Tôi sẽ nhập vào 2 câu và bạn sẽ suy luận mối liên hệ giữa 2 câu đấy giữa các nhãn sau

    Lewis, M., Liu, Y., Goyal, N., Ghazvininejad, M., Mohamed, A., Levy, O., Stoyanov, V., Zettlemoyer, L.: Bart: Denoising sequence-to-sequence pre-training for natural language generation, translation, and comprehen- sion. In: Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Associ...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.