To overcome scarce labeled data, Matryoshka Representation Learning truncation to 256 dimensions preserves 99.9% of retrieval quality while reducing dense-index storage and exact similarity arithmetic by a factor of three.
Abstract
Natural language code retrieval is a rapidly evolving task in computer science. However, the 1C:Enterprise ecosystem combines Russian syntax with highly domain-specific terminology, for which open datasets and specialized models have been virtually non-existent. We present a comprehensive pipeline for 1C code retrieval: an open benchmark of 3,413 real-world, PII-scrubbed query-code pairs, a reproducible evaluation harness, and a specialized bi-encoder. To overcome scarce labeled data, we fine-tune on 784,057 synthetic triplets generated by google/gemma-4-26B-A4B-it from public code repositories, using Matryoshka Representation Learning (MRL) and a privacy-aware tokenizer. Because the benchmark subsets differ in size, we report balanced-subset macro, query-weighted micro, and forum-only results. Our model reaches 0.5992 balanced macro nDCG@10, 0.5044 micro, and 0.4617 on forum, versus 0.4932 macro for the baseline architecture and 0.5404 for google/embeddinggemma-300m. Removing every benchmark example flagged by the conservative exact/13-gram overlap audit leaves 0.6011 balanced macro (0.5010 micro), indicating that detected train-benchmark overlap does not explain the headline result. MRL truncation to 256 dimensions preserves 99.9% of retrieval quality while reducing dense-index storage and exact similarity arithmetic by a factor of three.
Querying LLMs as digital libraries is feasible, but its effectiveness depends on model strength, deployment conditions, dataset structure, and execution strategy, and Galois remains valuable when relational discipline and controlled query execution are required.
This work presents MediaWiki Code2Code Search, a neural retrieval system for semantic code-to-code discovery, and demonstrates superior performance over the BM25 baseline, with gains most pronounced in name-obfuscated tasks where lexical methods fail.
AssistEM, a framework for efficient LLM adaptation to EM via principled data selection, demonstrates that selective fine-tuning not only accelerates adaptation but also improves training efficiency (requiring fewer GPU hours), enabling open-source LLMs to rival–and in some cases outperform–closed-source models.
John Bosco Mugeni, S. Lynden, Toshiyuki Amagasa et al.· International Journal of Dat...· 0 citations
A paired-prompt benchmark for human-versus-machine detection across English text, Python code, and mixed text–code documents shows that reliable deployment requires cross-domain evaluation, mixed-content testing, and calibration beyond in-distribution accuracy.
This paper tests whether prompting the same (frozen) SLM in three typologically diverse languages and aggregating the outputs can improve classification without retraining or translation, and suggests that cross-lingual diversity rather than surface-level input variation drives the gain.
We introduce SciRet, a compute-aware empirical study of retrieval-augmented generation for scientific question answering over CORD-19. Rather than proposing a new model, we evaluate a fixed scientific RAG pipeline across three corpus scales: 1,034 chunks (1K papers), 5,160 chunks (5K papers), and 15,480 chunks (15K papers). The pipeline combines sentence-window chunking, BM25, BGE-M3 dense retrieval, reciprocal rank fusion, optional cross-encoder reranking, and grounded answer generation. Across these settings, hybrid retrieval is more robust than either sparse-only or dense-only retrieval in our setting, reaching Recall@10 of 1.000 at 1K and 15K. In contrast, an MS MARCO-trained cross-encoder reranker reduces precision on the scientific corpus, suggesting that domain mismatch can outweigh the benefits of stronger query-passage interaction. Generation faithfulness measured with RAGAS increases with corpus scale in our setup. Retrieval evaluation uses pseudo-relevance labels derived from the hybrid system, so we treat the results as controlled comparative evidence rather than a benchmark claim. We release code, indexes, and evaluation outputs to support replication and follow-up studies.
Kaysarul Anas Apurba, Mahade Hasan, Rofiqul Alam Shehab et al.· 0 citations