cos_sim = util.cos_sim(emb1, emb2) print("Cosine-Similarity:", cos_sim) # Cosine-Similarity: tensor([ query in queries: query_embedding = embedder.encode(query, convert_to_tensor=True) # We use cosine-similarity
cos_sim = util.cos_sim(emb1, emb2) print("Cosine-Similarity:", cos_sim) # Cosine-Similarity: tensor([ query in queries: query_embedding = embedder.encode(query, convert_to_tensor=True) # We use cosine-similarity
来自论文:《Is Cosine-Similarity of Embeddings Really About Similarity? 》 举两个随意产生结果的例子: 1. 图源:https://www.machinelearningplus.com/nlp/cosine-similarity/ 语义文本相似度(STS)预测:专门为语义相似度任务训练的微调模型 (如 STSScore
- lior-k/fast-elasticsearch-vector-scoring: Score documents using embedding-vectors dot-product or cosine-similarity - lior-k/fast-elasticsearch-vector-scoring: Score documents using embedding-vectors dot-product or cosine-similarity
STS 任务使用 Cosine-Similarity 对句子向量进行评估,Cosine-Similarity 对所有维度平等处理;而 SentEval 使用逻辑回归分类器对句子向量分类,这就允许某些维度对分类结果有更高或更低的影响
cos_sim = util.pytorch_cos_sim(emb1, emb2) print("Cosine-Similarity:", cos_sim)
但是这并非是一个无解的问题,我们回归Item-based的本源思考为什么热门的条目会受到额外的照顾,抛出业务场景,其实根源在于Cosine-Similarity里分母开的那个根号惹的祸,可以想象10000
A:这篇论文探讨了在高维对象(如单词、用户或物品)的语义相似性度量中,余弦相似性(Cosine-similarity)的适用性和局限性。
算余弦值 cosine-similarity(q,d) = V(q) · V(d) ––––––––– |V(q)| |V(d)| V(q) · V(d) ––––––––– |V(q)|
但是这并非是一个无解的问题,我们回归Item-based的本源思考为什么热门的条目会受到额外的照顾,抛出业务场景,其实根源在于Cosine-Similarity里分母开的那个根号惹的祸,可以想象10000
Multimodal Understanding Across Millions of Tokens of Context 论文链接: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05530 论文标题:Is Cosine-Similarity