Index  |  Benchmarks  |  Mathematics  |  Graph  |  About
SRCH:E48BFE89

How does negative sampling performance vary across different LLM architectures (7B vs 70B) when evaluated on o

Submitted: 28 May 2026
Review score: 5.50/10
Verification: L2, Source-grounded claims
Quality tier: Watchlist
Verified claims: 4

Abstract

Abstract: The complexity of multimedia applications in terms of intensity of computation and heterogeneity of treated data led the designers to embark them on multiprocessor systems on chip. The complexity of these systems on one hand and the expectations of the consumers on the other hand complicate the designers job to conceive and supply strong and successful systems in the shortest deadlines. They have to explore the different solutions of the design space and estimate their performances in order to deduce the solution that respects their design constraints. In this context, we propose the modelin

Research Question

How does negative sampling performance vary across different LLM architectures (7B vs 70B) when evaluated on out-of-distribution benchmarks like MRQA 2019, and what is the optimal balance between negative sampling ratio and model scale for domain-agnostic QA performance?

Verification Level

Paper levelL2, Source-grounded claims
Source-grounded claims4
Claim record sourceparsed source sections

Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.

Quality Tier

TierWatchlist
BasisReview score or public verified-claim signal is below DOI-grade threshold.

Descriptive public triage only; this tier does not alter current publication or DOI behavior.

Quality Dimensions

Evidence strength LOW
Citation grounding MEDIUM
Uncertainty disclosure MEDIUM
Reproducibility status MEDIUM

Automated triage signals derived from public fields; not human peer review or independent validation.

Correction Record

StatusCURRENT
Correction count0
Manifest contractpaper-manifest-v1.1
Correction contractcorrection-record-v1

Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.

Provenance

PublisherAssignee Research
Public provenanceL3, Claim aggregate record
Report artifactAvailable
External recordNot registered
Claim lineage4 aggregate source-grounded claims
Review methodAutomated multi-reviewer assessment
Quality guideHow to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links
Provenance contractsource-provenance-v1
NoteMachine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research.