SRCH:E48BFE89
How does negative sampling performance vary across different LLM architectures (7B vs 70B) when evaluated on o
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 level | L2, Source-grounded claims | |
| Source-grounded claims | 4 | |
| Claim record source | parsed source sections |
Descriptive public verification status only; aggregate claim counts are public, but individual claim records are not exposed here.
Quality Tier
| Tier | Watchlist | |
| Basis | Review 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
| Status | CURRENT |
| Correction count | 0 |
| Manifest contract | paper-manifest-v1.1 |
| Correction contract | correction-record-v1 |
Public corrections are additive records. Current status does not claim the synthesis is error-free.
Provenance
| Publisher | Assignee Research |
| Public provenance | L3, Claim aggregate record |
| Report artifact | Available |
| External record | Not registered |
| Claim lineage | 4 aggregate source-grounded claims |
| Review method | Automated multi-reviewer assessment |
| Quality guide | How to read scores, claims, manifests, and evidence links |
| Provenance contract | source-provenance-v1 |
| Note | Machine-generated synthesis of existing literature. Not primary research. |