Instructions to use IoannisKat1/multilingual-e5-large-new with libraries, inference providers, notebooks, and local apps. Follow these links to get started.

Libraries

How to use IoannisKat1/multilingual-e5-large-new with sentence-transformers:

from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer

model = SentenceTransformer("IoannisKat1/multilingual-e5-large-new")

sentences = [
    "When did the victims give away credentials?",
    "According to the provision of Article 386 paragraph 1 of the Greek Penal Code,\n\n\"Whoever, with the intent to obtain for themselves or another an unlawful pecuniary benefit, causes damage to another’s property by persuading someone to act, omit, or tolerate something through the knowing misrepresentation of false facts as true, or through the unlawful concealment or suppression of true facts, shall be punished by imprisonment of at least three months, and if the damage caused is particularly large, by imprisonment of at least two years.\"\n\nFrom this provision it follows that, for the crime of fraud to be established, the following elements are required:\n\na) The intent of the perpetrator to obtain for themselves or another an unlawful pecuniary benefit, without it being necessary that the benefit actually materialize;\n\nb) The knowing misrepresentation of false facts as true, or the unlawful concealment or suppression of true facts, as a result of which—serving as the causal factor—someone is deceived and proceeds to an act, omission, or acquiescence that is detrimental to themselves or another; and\n\nc) Damage to another person’s property, as defined under civil law, which must be causally linked to the deceptive acts or omissions of the perpetrator. It is not required that the person deceived and the person who suffered the damage be the same individual.\n\nThe term “facts”, within the meaning of the above provision, refers to real circumstances relating to the past or present, and not to those that will occur in the future, such as mere promises or contractual obligations. However, when such promises or obligations are accompanied by false assurances and representations of other false facts referring to the present or the past, in such a manner as to create the impression of future fulfillment based on a false present situation fabricated by the perpetrator, who has already formed the decision not to fulfill their obligation, the crime of fraud is established.\n\nThe term “property” refers to the totality of a person’s economic assets that possess monetary value, while damage to property means its reduction—specifically, the difference between the monetary value the property had before the disposition caused by the fraudulent conduct and the value remaining after it. Property damage exists even if the victim possesses an active claim for restitution.\n\nThe time of commission of the fraud is considered to be the moment when the perpetrator acted and completed their fraudulent conduct, namely when they made the false representations that deceived the victim or a third party. Any subsequent moment at which the victim’s damage actually occurred—thereby completing the fraud—or the time when the victim carried out the harmful act or omission, is irrelevant.",
    "Voice phishing involves manipulating victims over the phone. Attackers pose as bank officials or authorities and use intimidation to extract financial details.\n\nScenario:\n- Victims are coerced into giving away PINs, passwords, or other credentials under false pretenses of legal or financial emergencies.",
    "According to the provision of Article 386 paragraph 1 of the Greek Penal Code,\n\n\"Whoever, with the intent to obtain for themselves or another an unlawful pecuniary benefit, causes damage to another’s property by persuading someone to act, omit, or tolerate something through the knowing misrepresentation of false facts as true, or through the unlawful concealment or suppression of true facts, shall be punished by imprisonment of at least three months, and if the damage caused is particularly large, by imprisonment of at least two years.\"\n\nFrom this provision, it follows that, for the crime of fraud to be established, the following elements are required:\n\na) The intent of the perpetrator to obtain for themselves or another an unlawful pecuniary benefit, without requiring that the benefit actually materialize;\n\nb) The knowing misrepresentation of false facts as true, or the unlawful concealment or suppression of true facts, as a result of which—serving as the causal factor—someone is deceived and performs an act, omission, or acquiescence; and\n\nc) Damage to another’s property, according to civil law, which must be causally connected to the perpetrator’s deceptive acts or omissions. It is not required that the deceived person and the person who suffered the loss be the same.\n\nThe term “facts,” within the meaning of the above provision, refers to real circumstances relating to the past or present, and not to those that will occur in the future, such as mere promises or contractual obligations. However, when such promises or obligations are accompanied by false assurances and representations of other false facts relating to the present or the past, in such a way as to create the impression of future fulfillment, based on a false present situation fabricated by the perpetrator—who has already made the decision not to fulfill their obligation—then the crime of fraud is established.\n\nThe term “property” denotes the totality of a person’s economic assets possessing monetary value, while damage to property refers to its reduction—specifically, the difference between the property’s monetary value before the disposition caused by the fraudulent conduct and its value afterward. Property damage exists even if the victim has an active claim for its restitution.\n\nThe time of commission of fraud is considered to be the moment when the perpetrator acted and completed the deceptive conduct, that is, when they made the false representations which deceived the victim or a third party. Any later time at which the victim’s financial loss occurred—thus completing the fraud—or the time when the harmful act or omission of the deceived person took place, is irrelevant.\n\nThe reference to multiple modes of commission of fraud (i.e., both the misrepresentation of false facts and the concealment of true ones) may create ambiguity and contradiction, unless it is made clear from the overall findings that the offense was committed in one particular manner, and that the reference to the other merely serves to define the intent (mens rea) of the perpetrator—specifically, that the representations were false.\n\nFurthermore, a conviction must contain the specific and well-reasoned justification required by Articles 93 paragraph 3 of the Constitution and 139 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The absence of such reasoning constitutes grounds for cassation (appeal) under Article 510 paragraph 1(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, when the judgment does not set out, with clarity, completeness, and consistency, the factual circumstances established by the evidence, upon which the court based its findings regarding the objective and subjective elements of the offense, the evidence supporting those findings, and the legal reasoning through which those facts were subsumed under the applicable substantive criminal provision.\n\nFor the existence of such reasoning, the explanatory and operative parts of the decision may complement each other, as they form a single, unified whole.\n\nThe existence of intent (dolus) does not generally need to be specially justified, since it is inherent in the will to bring about the factual circumstances constituting the objective elements of the offense, and it is presumed from their realization in each particular case—unless the law requires additional elements for criminal liability, such as the act being committed with knowledge of a specific circumstance (direct intent) or with the pursuit of a further purpose, i.e., the achievement of an additional result (offenses requiring a special subjective element).\n\nFurthermore, under Article 510 paragraph 1(e) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a misapplication of substantive criminal law also constitutes grounds for cassation. Such misapplication occurs when the trial court incorrectly applies the law to the facts it has found to be true, or when the violation occurs indirectly, namely when the reasoning of the judgment—comprising the combination of its factual and operative parts and relating to the elements and identity of the offense—contains ambiguities, contradictions, or logical gaps, rendering it impossible to verify, on appeal, whether the law was applied correctly. In such cases, the judgment lacks a lawful basis."
]
embeddings = model.encode(sentences)

similarities = model.similarity(embeddings, embeddings)
print(similarities.shape)
# [4, 4]

Notebooks
Google Colab
Kaggle

multilingual-e5-large-new / checkpoint-39 /README.md

IoannisKat1

Add finetuned model

42557c6 verified 9 months ago

preview code

raw

history blame contribute delete

96.7 kB

metadata

language:
  - en
license: apache-2.0
tags:
  - sentence-transformers
  - sentence-similarity
  - feature-extraction
  - dense
  - generated_from_trainer
  - dataset_size:391
  - loss:MatryoshkaLoss
  - loss:MultipleNegativesRankingLoss
base_model: intfloat/multilingual-e5-large
widget:
  - source_sentence: >-
      What is the responsibility of assisting and advising the data subjects in
      exercising their rights?
    sentences:
      - >-
        1.Personal data shall be: (a)  processed lawfully, fairly and in a
        transparent manner in relation to the data subject (‘lawfulness,
        fairness and transparency’); (b)  collected for specified, explicit and
        legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner that is
        incompatible with those purposes; further processing for archiving
        purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research
        purposes or statistical purposes shall, in accordance with Article
        89(1), not be considered to be incompatible with the initial purposes
        (‘purpose limitation’); (c)  adequate, relevant and limited to what is
        necessary in relation to the purposes for which they are processed
        (‘data minimisation’); (d)  accurate and, where necessary, kept up to
        date; every reasonable step must be taken to ensure that personal data
        that are inaccurate, having regard to the purposes for which they are
        processed, are erased or rectified without delay (‘accuracy’); 4.5.2016
        L 119/35   (1) Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and
        of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the
        provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of
        rules on Information Society services (OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1). (e) 
        kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no
        longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the personal data
        are processed; personal data may be stored for longer periods insofar as
        the personal data will be processed solely for archiving purposes in the
        public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or
        statistical purposes in accordance with Article 89(1) subject to
        implementation of the appropriate technical and organisational measures
        required by this Regulation in order to safeguard the rights and
        freedoms of the data subject (‘storage limitation’); (f)  processed in a
        manner that ensures appropriate security of the personal data, including
        protection against unauthorised or unlawful processing and against
        accidental loss, destruction or damage, using appropriate technical or
        organisational measures (‘integrity and confidentiality’).

        2.The controller shall be responsible for, and be able to demonstrate
        compliance with, paragraph 1 (‘accountability’).
      - >-
        1.A transfer of personal data to a third country or an international
        organisation may take place where the Commission has decided that the
        third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within that
        third country, or the international organisation in question ensures an
        adequate level of protection. Such a transfer shall not require any
        specific authorisation.

        2.When assessing the adequacy of the level of protection, the Commission
        shall, in particular, take account of the following elements: (a)  the
        rule of law, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, relevant
        legislation, both general and sectoral, including concerning public
        security, defence, national security and criminal law and the access of
        public authorities to personal data, as well as the implementation of
        such legislation, data protection rules, professional rules and security
        measures, including rules for the onward transfer of personal data to
        another third country or international organisation which are complied
        with in that country or international organisation, case-law, as well as
        effective and enforceable data subject rights and effective
        administrative and judicial redress for the data subjects whose personal
        data are being transferred; (b)  the existence and effective functioning
        of one or more independent supervisory authorities in the third country
        or to which an international organisation is subject, with
        responsibility for ensuring and enforcing compliance with the data
        protection rules, including adequate enforcement powers, for assisting
        and advising the data subjects in exercising their rights and for
        cooperation with the supervisory authorities of the Member States; and
        (c)  the international commitments the third country or international
        organisation concerned has entered into, or other obligations arising
        from legally binding conventions or instruments as well as from its
        participation in multilateral or regional systems, in particular in
        relation to the protection of personal data.

        3.The Commission, after assessing the adequacy of the level of
        protection, may decide, by means of implementing act, that a third
        country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within a third
        country, or an international organisation ensures an adequate level of
        protection within the meaning of paragraph 2 of this Article. The
        implementing act shall provide for a mechanism for a periodic review, at
        least every four years, which shall take into account all relevant
        developments in the third country or international organisation. The
        implementing act shall specify its territorial and sectoral application
        and, where applicable, identify the supervisory authority or authorities
        referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2 of this Article. The
        implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination
        procedure referred to in Article 93(2).

        4.The Commission shall, on an ongoing basis, monitor developments in
        third countries and international organisations that could affect the
        functioning of decisions adopted pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article
        and decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) of Directive
        95/46/EC.

        5.The Commission shall, where available information reveals, in
        particular following the review referred to in paragraph 3 of this
        Article, that a third country, a territory or one or more specified
        sectors within a third country, or an international organisation no
        longer ensures an adequate level of protection within the meaning of
        paragraph 2 of this Article, to the extent necessary, repeal, amend or
        suspend the decision referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article by means
        of implementing acts without retro-active effect. Those implementing
        acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure
        referred to in Article 93(2). On duly justified imperative grounds of
        urgency, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing
        acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 93(3).

        6.The Commission shall enter into consultations with the third country
        or international organisation with a view to remedying the situation
        giving rise to the decision made pursuant to paragraph 5

        7.A decision pursuant to paragraph 5 of this Article is without
        prejudice to transfers of personal data to the third country, a
        territory or one or more specified sectors within that third country, or
        the international organisation in question pursuant to Articles 46 to 49

        8.The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European
        Union and on its website a list of the third countries, territories and
        specified sectors within a third country and international organisations
        for which it has decided that an adequate level of protection is or is
        no longer ensured.

        9.Decisions adopted by the Commission on the basis of Article 25(6) of
        Directive 95/46/EC shall remain in force until amended, replaced or
        repealed by a Commission Decision adopted in accordance with paragraph 3
        or 5 of this Article.
      - >-
        The legal systems of Denmark and Estonia do not allow for administrative
        fines as set out in this Regulation. The rules on administrative fines
        may be applied in such a manner that in Denmark the fine is imposed by
        competent national courts as a criminal penalty and in Estonia the fine
        is imposed by the supervisory authority in the framework of a
        misdemeanour procedure, provided that such an application of the rules
        in those Member States has an equivalent effect to administrative fines
        imposed by supervisory authorities. Therefore the competent national
        courts should take into account the recommendation by the supervisory
        authority initiating the fine. In any event, the fines imposed should be
        effective, proportionate and dissuasive.
  - source_sentence: Is the fine mandatory for the described offense?
    sentences:
      - >-
        1.Each supervisory authority shall ensure that the imposition of
        administrative fines pursuant to this Article in respect of
        infringements of this Regulation referred to in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6
        shall in each individual case be effective, proportionate and
        dissuasive.

        2.Administrative fines shall, depending on the circumstances of each
        individual case, be imposed in addition to, or instead of, measures
        referred to in points (a) to (h) and (j) of Article 58(2). When deciding
        whether to impose an administrative fine and deciding on the amount of
        the administrative fine in each individual case due regard shall be
        given to the following: (a)  the nature, gravity and duration of the
        infringement taking into account the nature scope or purpose of the
        processing concerned as well as the number of data subjects affected and
        the level of damage suffered by them; (b)  the intentional or negligent
        character of the infringement; (c)  any action taken by the controller
        or processor to mitigate the damage suffered by data subjects; (d)  the
        degree of responsibility of the controller or processor taking into
        account technical and organisational measures implemented by them
        pursuant to Articles 25 and 32; (e)  any relevant previous infringements
        by the controller or processor; (f)  the degree of cooperation with the
        supervisory authority, in order to remedy the infringement and mitigate
        the possible adverse effects of the infringement; (g)  the categories of
        personal data affected by the infringement; (h)  the manner in which the
        infringement became known to the supervisory authority, in particular
        whether, and if so to what extent, the controller or processor notified
        the infringement; (i)  where measures referred to in Article 58(2) have
        previously been ordered against the controller or processor concerned
        with regard to the same subject-matter, compliance with those measures;
        (j)  adherence to approved codes of conduct pursuant to Article 40 or
        approved certification mechanisms pursuant to Article 42; and (k)  any
        other aggravating or mitigating factor applicable to the circumstances
        of the case, such as financial benefits gained, or losses avoided,
        directly or indirectly, from the infringement.

        3.If a controller or processor intentionally or negligently, for the
        same or linked processing operations, infringes several provisions of
        this Regulation, the total amount of the administrative fine shall not
        exceed the amount specified for the gravest infringement.

        4.Infringements of the following provisions shall, in accordance with
        paragraph 2, be subject to administrative fines up to 10 000 000 EUR, or
        in the case of an undertaking, up to 2 % of the total worldwide annual
        turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher: (a)  the
        obligations of the controller and the processor pursuant to Articles 8,
        11, 25 to 39 and 42 and 43; (b)  the obligations of the certification
        body pursuant to Articles 42 and 43; (c)  the obligations of the
        monitoring body pursuant to Article 41(4). 4.5.2016 L 119/82  

        5.Infringements of the following provisions shall, in accordance with
        paragraph 2, be subject to administrative fines up to 20 000 000 EUR, or
        in the case of an undertaking, up to 4 % of the total worldwide annual
        turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher: (a)  the
        basic principles for processing, including conditions for consent,
        pursuant to Articles 5, 6, 7 and 9; (b)  the data subjects' rights
        pursuant to Articles 12 to 22; (c)  the transfers of personal data to a
        recipient in a third country or an international organisation pursuant
        to Articles 44 to 49; (d)  any obligations pursuant to Member State law
        adopted under Chapter IX; (e)  non-compliance with an order or a
        temporary or definitive limitation on processing or the suspension of
        data flows by the supervisory authority pursuant to Article 58(2) or
        failure to provide access in violation of Article 58(1).

        6.Non-compliance with an order by the supervisory authority as referred
        to in Article 58(2) shall, in accordance with paragraph 2 of this
        Article, be subject to administrative fines up to 20 000 000 EUR, or in
        the case of an undertaking, up to 4 % of the total worldwide annual
        turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.

        7.Without prejudice to the corrective powers of supervisory authorities
        pursuant to Article 58(2), each Member State may lay down the rules on
        whether and to what extent administrative fines may be imposed on public
        authorities and bodies established in that Member State.

        8.The exercise by the supervisory authority of its powers under this
        Article shall be subject to appropriate procedural safeguards in
        accordance with Union and Member State law, including effective judicial
        remedy and due process.

        9.Where the legal system of the Member State does not provide for
        administrative fines, this Article may be applied in such a manner that
        the fine is initiated by the competent supervisory authority and imposed
        by competent national courts, while ensuring that those legal remedies
        are effective and have an equivalent effect to the administrative fines
        imposed by supervisory authorities. In any event, the fines imposed
        shall be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Those Member States
        shall notify to the Commission the provisions of their laws which they
        adopt pursuant to this paragraph by 25 May 2018 and, without delay, any
        subsequent amendment law or amendment affecting them.
      - >-
        Court (Civil/Criminal): Criminal  

        Provisions: Article 386 of the Penal Code  

        Time of commission of the act:  

        Result (innocent, guilty):  

        Reasoning: Conviction for computer fraud committed repeatedly and
        professionally with a total benefit and damage exceeding €30,000.
        According to the majority opinion, the charge is substantiated in both
        its objective and subjective aspects, and the defendant must be declared
        guilty of the aforementioned criminal acts of fraud by means of a
        computer, committed repeatedly by a perpetrator acting professionally,
        where the total financial benefit and corresponding damage exceed the
        amount of €30,000, as well as for repeated embezzlement.


        Facts: The defendant accessed a website using a computer, employing,
        without the knowledge and consent of the complainants, the access codes
        for the electronic management system of the bank accounts held by the
        complainants at a Bank, and transferred money through electronically
        transmitted orders from the complainants' accounts to her own account.
        Specifically, during the period from June 2007 to June 2008, after
        unlawfully acquiring the aforementioned STICK containing the access
        codes, she accessed a website maintained by ..., using, without the
        complainants' knowledge (without their consent or approval), the access
        codes for the electronic management system of the bank accounts held at
        the aforementioned Bank, transferring through electronically transmitted
        orders to the joint account number ... of the complainants from bank
        accounts numbered ..., ..., and ..., the total amount of €55,710, as
        detailed in the orders, and subsequently, using an ATM card, she
        gradually withdrew from the aforementioned account number ..., the total
        amount of €55,710, making 84 individual withdrawals from automatic
        teller machines. In addition, the defendant, during the period from June
        2008 to November 2008, in the same exact manner (through the electronic
        management system of the bank accounts), transferred through
        electronically transmitted orders to account number ..., which she had
        opened at ..., from the complainants' bank accounts numbered ..., ...,
        ..., ..., and ..., the total amount of €73,942, as detailed in the
        orders regarding the transfers of these amounts. Furthermore, during the
        period from February 2008 to November 2008, through multiple acts
        constituting a continuation of the crime, although she had received from
        the first complainant ... the amounts of €695.04, €695.04, and €845.04,
        in order to pay his insurance contributions to O.A.E.E. for the periods
        of January-February 2008, May-June 2008, and September-October 2008, as
        well as the amounts of €250 and €280, in order to settle credit card
        bills for "...", respectively, and from the second complainant ... she
        received the amounts of €283.64, €419.26, and €385.38, to pay the
        latter's insurance contributions to O.A.E.E. for the periods of
        July-August 2007, May-June 2008, September-October 2008, and
        November-December 2008, as well as the amount of €1,888.03 for the
        settlement of VAT, she never paid the above amounts to settle the
        aforementioned obligations, nor did she return them to the complainants,
        despite being urged to do so, but incorporated them into her assets and
        wrongfully appropriated them. The defendant denies the charges against
        her and claims that the withdrawals were made by the second complainant
        and that all the amounts transferred to her account were transferred to
        cover the company's expenses and their personal expenses, due to her
        cohabitation with the second complainant and with his knowledge, with
        whom she intended to marry. However, this claim is not supported by any
        evidence; on the contrary, it emerged that she conducted the transfers
        of the money and withdrawals without the complainants' knowledge, and
        when she learned that they had been informed about the account movements
        and met at the Bank, her behavior and demeanor indicated guilt,
        according to the testimony of the prosecution witness ..., an employee
        of the Pangrati branch of ..., who saw her on the same day at the
        aforementioned Bank when she met with the complainants. The ongoing act
        of fraud using a computer was committed by the defendant professionally,
        as evidenced by her repeated commission of the act, as well as the
        infrastructure she had established with the intent of repeated
        commission, based on a specific plan and methodology (transferring
        smaller amounts to a joint account of the complainants from the
        remaining accounts of the latter, and then withdrawing the transferred
        amounts with an ATM card, as well as directly transferring smaller
        amounts from the complainants' accounts to her personal account she had
        opened at the same bank), indicating her purpose to generate income,
        with the financial benefit she gained, corresponding to the
        complainants' damage, exceeding a total of €30,000.
      - >
        Any person who intentionally, through the technology of information and
        communication, suggests an encounter between an adult and a minor under
        the age of fifteen, aiming at the commitment of the crimes described in
        par. 1 and 2 of art. 339 and 348Α, is sentenced to an imprisonment of at
        least two years and a fine of fifty to two hundred thousand Euros, when
        the proposal is followed by further actions which lead in the commitment
        of such crimes.
  - source_sentence: >-
      Who should provide authorisation when safeguards are detailed in
      non-legally binding administrative arrangements?
    sentences:
      - >-
        In the absence of an adequacy decision, the controller or processor
        should take measures to compensate for the lack of data protection in a
        third country by way of appropriate safeguards for the data subject.
        Such appropriate safeguards may consist of making use of binding
        corporate rules, standard data protection clauses adopted by the
        Commission, standard data protection clauses adopted by a supervisory
        authority or contractual clauses authorised by a supervisory authority.
        Those safeguards should ensure compliance with data protection
        requirements and the rights of the data subjects appropriate to
        processing within the Union, including the availability of enforceable
        data subject rights and of effective legal remedies, including to obtain
        effective administrative or judicial redress and to claim compensation,
        in the Union or in a third country. They should relate in particular to
        compliance with the general principles relating to personal data
        processing, the principles of data protection by design and by default.
        Transfers may also be carried out by public authorities or bodies with
        public authorities or bodies in third countries or with international
        organisations with corresponding duties or functions, including on the
        basis of provisions to be inserted into administrative arrangements,
        such as a memorandum of understanding, providing for enforceable and
        effective rights for data subjects. Authorisation by the competent
        supervisory authority should be obtained when the safeguards are
        provided for in administrative arrangements that are not legally
        binding.
      - >-
        **Court (Civil/Criminal): Civil**


        **Provisions:**


        **Time of commission of the act:**


        **Outcome (not guilty, guilty):**


        **Rationale:**


        **Facts:**

        The plaintiff holds credit card number ............ with the defendant
        banking corporation. Based on the application for alternative networks
        dated 19/7/2015 with number ......... submitted at a branch of the
        defendant, he was granted access to the electronic banking service
        (e-banking) to conduct banking transactions (debit, credit, updates,
        payments) remotely. On 30/11/2020, the plaintiff fell victim to
        electronic fraud through the "phishing" method, whereby an unknown
        perpetrator managed to withdraw a total amount of €3,121.75 from the
        aforementioned credit card. Specifically, the plaintiff received an
        email at 1:35 PM on 29/11/2020 from sender ...... with address ........,
        informing him that due to an impending system change, he needed to
        verify the mobile phone number linked to the credit card, urging him to
        complete the verification process within the next 24 hours by following
        a link titled ........; otherwise, his account would be locked for
        security reasons. The plaintiff read this email on the afternoon of 30
        November 2020 and, believing it was from the defendant, followed the
        instructions and proceeded via the provided link to a website that was
        identical (a clone) to that of the defendant. On this page, he was asked
        to enter the six-digit security code (.........) that had just been sent
        to his mobile phone by the defendant at 3:41 PM, with the note that it
        was an activation code for his ........ card at ........., which he
        entered.


        Subsequently, the plaintiff received, according to his statements, a new
        email (not submitted), which requested him to enter the details of the
        aforementioned credit card, specifically the name of the cardholder and
        the card number, not the PIN, which he also entered, convinced that he
        was within the online environment of the defendant. Then, at 3:47 PM, he
        received a message on his mobile phone from the defendant containing the
        exact same content as the one he received at 3:41 PM, while at 3:50 PM
        he received a message stating that the activation of his ......... card
        at ....... had been completed. Once the plaintiff read this, he became
        concerned that something was not right, and immediately called (at 4:41
        PM) the defendant's call center to inform them. There, the employees,
        with whom he finally connected at 5:04 PM due to high call center
        volume, advised him to delete the relevant emails, cancel his credit
        card, change his access passwords for the service, and submit a dispute
        request regarding the conducted transactions. The plaintiff
        electronically sent this request to the defendant, disputing the
        detailed transactions amounting to €3,121.75, which were conducted on
        30/11/2020 during the time frame of 16:37:45-16:43:34 PM, arguing that
        he had neither performed them himself nor authorized anyone else to do
        so. The plaintiff specifically disputed the following transactions, as
        evidenced by the account activity of the disputed credit card during the
        aforementioned timeframe: a) transaction number ......... amounting to
        €150.62 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:43:34 PM, b) transaction number
        ........ amounting to €293.20 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:42:40 PM, c)
        transaction number ............ amounting to €295.21 conducted on
        30/11/2020 at 4:42:10 PM, d) transaction number .......... amounting to
        €299.22 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:41:31 PM, e) transaction number
        ........ amounting to €297.21 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:41:01 PM, f)
        transaction number ........ amounting to €299.22 conducted on 30/11/2020
        at 4:40:27 PM, g) transaction number ....... amounting to €299.22
        conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:39:55 PM, h) transaction number ......
        amounting to €299.22 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:39:22 PM, i)
        transaction number ......... amounting to €297.22 conducted on
        30/11/2020 at 4:38:52 PM, j) transaction number ......... amounting to
        €295.21 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:38:17 PM, and k) transaction number
        ......... amounting to €296.21 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:37:45 PM. In
        its response letter dated 21/12/2020, the defendant denied
        responsibility for the costs of the aforementioned transactions, placing
        the entire blame on the plaintiff for the leak of his card details and
        security code to the fraudulent page. The plaintiff, completely denying
        any fault for the conducted transactions, repeatedly contacted the
        defendant, both by phone and via email (see emails dated 15/1/2021 and
        11/2/2021), while on 2/3/2021, he electronically sent a report dated
        1/03/2021 to the Consumer Advocate’s email address, recounting the
        events and requesting that the aforementioned Independent Authority
        intervene to have the disputed debt canceled. In its letter with
        reference number ...../27.04.2021, the aforementioned Independent
        Authority informed the plaintiff that the case was outside its mediating
        role and was therefore archived. Subsequently, the plaintiff sent the
        defendant on 5/3/2021 his extrajudicial statement dated 4/3/2021,
        calling upon it to fully cancel the debt of €3,121.75 that had been
        unjustly incurred against him within two days and to immediately
        instruct the representatives of the collection agency working with it to
        cease contacting him regarding the disputed case. The defendant sent the
        plaintiff a message on his mobile phone on 20/04/2021 informing him that
        his case was still being processed due to lengthy operational
        requirements, while on 23/04/2021, via email, it informed him that
        considering their good cooperation and his efforts to keep them updated,
        it had reviewed his case and decided to refund him the amounts of the
        transactions that were conducted after his contact with their
        representatives on 30/11/2020 at 4:41 PM, totaling €1,038.25,
        specifically the following: a) transaction of €150.62 conducted on
        30/11/2020 at 4:43 PM, b) transaction of €295.21 conducted on 30/11/2020
        at 4:42 PM, c) transaction of €293.20 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:42
        PM, and d) transaction of €299.22 conducted on 30/11/2020 at 4:41 PM.
        Beyond this, the defendant refused to refund the plaintiff the amount of
        the remaining transactions conducted on 30/11/2020, totaling €2,376.08
        (and not €2,376.48 as incorrectly stated by the plaintiff in his
        lawsuit), which the plaintiff ultimately fully paid, transferring
        €2,342.77 to the defendant on 7/06/2021 and €33.31 on 15/06/2021 (see
        related deposit receipts).
      - >-
        Court (Civil/Criminal): Civil  

        Provisions:  

        Time of commission: July 21, 2020  

        Outcome (innocent, guilty): Partially accepts the lawsuit against the
        Bank.  

        Reasoning: Alongside the bank's responsibility for the ineffective
        protection of its systems against the continually changing and evolving
        methods of deception that affect them, leading to financial damage for
        its clients who entrusted it, which constitutes a breach of its
        contractual obligations and generates contractual liability, there is
        also the personal responsibility of the plaintiff, who did not
        safeguard, as required, his sensitive banking information and disclosed
        it when he should not have, even though the message that misled him came
        from the context of an SMS conversation with the defendant, even if he
        was directed through the link to a website resembling that of the
        defendant, because he overlooked the relevant instructions and strict
        recommendations of the bank, violating his duty to safeguard them.
        Therefore, in light of the above, the court must partially accept the
        lawsuit regarding its substance, and with the defendant's objection
        regarding the plaintiff's fault being accepted at a rate of 1/6 of the
        damage suffered, it must be acknowledged – following the admissible and
        lawful modification of the lawsuit's request from a dismissive to a
        declaratory nature as proposed – the defendant's obligation to pay him
        the amount of €2,500, with legal interest, as specified in the operative
        part. Regarding the request to recognize the defendant's obligation to
        pay him €1,000 as compensation for the moral damage he suffered from the
        fraud committed against him, this is deemed dismissible as unfounded,
        because the defendant's liability is contractual and not tortious, and
        there are no special conditions justifying the treatment of this
        specific non-contractual behavior as tortious, making it possible to
        attribute moral damage to the plaintiff from the defendant.  

        Facts: The plaintiff maintained a joint bank account with his wife and
        had access to the defendant bank's e-banking. On July 21, 2020,
        following successful identification via the agreed-upon credentials
        (userID, password, OTP), a request was made to change the mobile phone
        number for receiving OTPs, which was completed through the bank's
        platform. However, this change was not made by the plaintiff himself,
        but by a third party who had previously deceived him using the phishing
        method, obtaining his banking details through a misleading SMS.
        Following the phone number change, on July 31, 2020, a transfer of
        €3,000 was made to a third party's account. The transaction was
        conducted using the necessary credentials and OTP sent to the new mobile
        phone, resulting in the bank considering the order valid and executing
        it. Once the plaintiff realized the transfer, he immediately contacted
        the bank and informed them that he had not given such an order himself.
        Despite the initial assurance that the funds could be recovered, they
        were ultimately not returned, as they had been transferred to a third
        party's account, and the bank denied any responsibility for the loss.
  - source_sentence: When will the periodic review mechanism be conducted?
    sentences:
      - >-
        The Commission should monitor the functioning of decisions on the level
        of protection in a third country, a territory or specified sector within
        a third country, or an international organisation, and monitor the
        functioning of decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) or
        Article 26(4) of Directive 95/46/EC. In its adequacy decisions, the
        Commission should provide for a periodic review mechanism of their
        functioning. That periodic review should be conducted in consultation
        with the third country or international organisation in question and
        take into account all relevant developments in the third country or
        international organisation. For the purposes of monitoring and of
        carrying out the periodic reviews, the Commission should take into
        consideration the views and findings of the European Parliament and of
        the Council as well as of other relevant bodies and sources. The
        Commission should evaluate, within a reasonable time, the functioning of
        the latter decisions and report any relevant findings to the Committee
        within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European
        Parliament and of the Council (1) as established under this Regulation,
        to the European Parliament and to the Council.
      - >-
        **Court (Civil/Criminal): Civil**  

        **Provisions:**  

        **Time of commission of the act:**  

        **Outcome (not guilty, guilty):**  

        **Reasoning:** Partially accepts the lawsuit.  

        **Facts:** The plaintiff, who works as a lawyer, maintains a savings
        account with the defendant banking corporation under account number
        GR.............. Pursuant to a contract dated June 11, 2010, established
        in Thessaloniki between the defendant and the plaintiff, the plaintiff
        was granted access to the electronic banking system (e-banking) to
        conduct banking transactions remotely. On October 10, 2020, the
        plaintiff fell victim to electronic fraud through the "phishing" method,
        whereby an unknown perpetrator managed to extract and transfer €3,000.00
        from the plaintiff’s account to another account of the same bank.
        Specifically, on that day at 6:51 a.m., the plaintiff received an email
        from the sender ".........", with the address ..........., informing him
        that his debit card had been suspended and that online payments and cash
        withdrawals could not be made until the issue was resolved. The email
        urged him to confirm his details within the next 72 hours by following a
        link titled "card activation."  

        The plaintiff read the above email on his mobile phone around 8:00 a.m.,
        and believing it came from the defendant, he followed the instructions
        and accessed a website that was identical (a clone) to that of the
        defendant. On this page, he was asked to enter his login credentials to
        connect to the service, which he did, and he was subsequently asked to
        input his debit card details for the alleged activation, which he also
        provided. Then, to complete the process, a number was sent to his mobile
        phone at 8:07 a.m. from the sender ........, which he entered, and two
        minutes later he received a message from the same sender in English
        stating that the quick access code had been activated on his mobile. A
        few minutes later, at 8:18 a.m., he received an email from the defendant
        informing him of the transfer of €3,000.00 from his account to account
        number GR ........... held at the same bank, with the beneficiary's
        details being .......... As soon as the plaintiff read this, he
        immediately called the defendant's call center and canceled his debit
        card, the access codes for the service ......., and locked the
        application .......... At the same time, he verbally submitted a request
        to dispute and cancel the contested transaction, and in a subsequent
        phone call, he also canceled his credit card. On the same day, he also
        sent an email to the defendant informing them in writing of the above
        and requesting the cancellation of the transaction and the return of the
        amount of €3,000.00 to his account, as this transfer was not made by him
        but by an unknown perpetrator through electronic fraud and was not
        approved by him. It should also be noted that the plaintiff, as the sole
        beneficiary according to the aforementioned contract for using the
        defendant's Internet Banking service, never received any update via SMS
        or the VIBER application from the bank regarding the transaction details
        before its completion, nor did he receive a one-time code (OTP) to
        approve the contested transaction. He subsequently filed a complaint
        against unknown persons at the Cyber Crime Division for the crime of
        fraud. The defendant sent an email to the plaintiff on October 16, 2020,
        informing him that his request had been forwarded to the appropriate
        department of the bank for investigation, stating that the bank would
        never send him an email or SMS asking him to enter his personal data and
        that as of October 7, 2020, there was a notice posted for its customers
        regarding malicious attempts to steal personal data in the "Our News"
        section on ....... A month after the disputed incident, on November 10,
        2020, an amount of €2,296.82 was transferred to the plaintiff's account
        from the account to which the fraudulent credit had been made. The
        plaintiff immediately sent an email to the defendant asking to be
        informed whether this transfer was a return of part of the amount that
        had been illegally withdrawn from his account and requested the return
        of the remaining amount of €703.18. In its response dated January 13,
        2021, the defendant confirmed that the aforementioned amount indeed came
        from the account to which the fraudulent credit had been made, following
        a freeze of that account initiated by the defendant during the
        investigation of the incident, but refused to return the remaining
        amount, claiming it bore no responsibility for the leak of the personal
        codes to third parties, according to the terms of the service contract
        established between them.  

        From the entirety of the evidence presented to the court, there is no
        indication of the authenticity of the contested transaction, as the
        plaintiff did not give his consent for the execution of the transfer of
        the amount of €3,000.00, especially in light of the provision in Article
        72 paragraph 2 of Law 4537/2018 stating that the mere use of the
        Internet Banking service by the plaintiff does not necessarily
        constitute sufficient evidence that the payer approved the payment
        action. Specifically, it was proven that the contested transaction was
        not carried out following a strong identification of the plaintiff – the
        sole beneficiary of the account – and his approval, as the latter may
        have entered his personal codes on the counterfeit website; however, he
        was never informed, before the completion of the contested transaction,
        of the amount that would be transferred from his account to a
        third-party account, nor did he receive on his mobile phone, either via
        SMS or through the VIBER application or any other means, the one-time
        code - extra PIN for its completion, which he was required to enter to
        approve the contested transaction (payment action) and thus complete his
        identification, a fact that was not countered by any evidence from the
        defendant. Furthermore, it is noted that the defendant's claims that it
        bears no responsibility under the terms of the banking services
        contract, whereby it is not liable for any damage to its customer in
        cases of unauthorized use of their personal access codes to the Internet
        Banking service, are to be rejected as fundamentally unfounded. This is
        because the aforementioned contractual terms are invalid according to
        the provision of Article 103 of Law 4537/2018, as they contradict the
        provisions of Articles 71, 73, and 92 of the same Law, which provide for
        the provider's universal liability and its exemption only for unusual
        and unforeseen circumstances that are beyond the control of the party
        invoking them and whose consequences could not have been avoided despite
        all efforts to the contrary; these provisions establish mandatory law in
        favor of users, as according to Article 103 of Law 4537/2018, payment
        service providers are prohibited from deviating from the provisions to
        the detriment of payment service users, unless the possibility of
        deviation is explicitly provided and they can decide to offer only more
        favorable terms to payment service users; the aforementioned contractual
        terms do not constitute more favorable terms but rather disadvantageous
        terms for the payment service user. In this case, however, the defendant
        did not prove the authenticity of the transaction and its approval by
        the plaintiff and did not invoke, nor did any unusual and unforeseen
        circumstances beyond its control, the consequences of which could not
        have been avoided despite all efforts to the contrary, come to light.
        Therefore, the contested transaction transferring the amount of
        €3,000.00 is considered, in the absence of demonstrable consent from the
        plaintiff, unapproved according to the provisions of Article 64 of Law
        4537/2018, and the defendant's contrary claims are rejected, especially
        since the plaintiff proceeded, according to Article 71 paragraph 1 of
        Law 4537/2018, without undue delay to notify the defendant regarding the
        contested unapproved payment action. Consequently, the defendant is
        liable for compensating the plaintiff for the positive damage he
        suffered under Article 73 of Law 4537/2018 and is obliged to pay him the
        requested amount of €703.18, while the plaintiff’s fault in the
        occurrence of this damage cannot be established, as he entered his
        personal details in an online environment that was a faithful imitation
        of that of the defendant, as evidenced by the comparison of the
        screenshots of the fake website and the real website provided by the
        plaintiff, a fact that he could not have known while being fully
        convinced that he was transacting with the defendant. Furthermore, the
        defendant’s liability to compensate the plaintiff is based on the
        provision of Article 8 of Law 2251/1994, which applies in this case, as
        the plaintiff's damage resulted from inadequate fulfillment of its
        obligations in the context of providing its services, but also on the
        provision of Article 914 of the Civil Code in the sense of omission on
        its part of unlawfully and culpably imposed actions. In this case, given
        that during the relevant period there had been a multitude of similar
        incidents of fraud against the defendant's customers, the latter, as a
        service provider to the consumer public and bearing transactional
        obligations of care and security towards them, displayed gross
        negligence regarding the security provided for electronic transaction
        services, which was compromised by the fraudulent theft of funds, as it
        did not comply with all required high-security measures for executing
        the contested transaction, failing to implement the strict customer
        identification verification process and to check the authenticity of the
        account to which the funds were sent, thus not assuming the suspicious
        nature of the transaction, did not adopt comprehensive and improved
        protective measures to fully protect its customers against malicious
        attacks and online fraud and to prevent the infiltration of unauthorized
        third parties, nor did it fulfill its obligations to inform, accurately
        inform, and warn its consumers - customers, as it failed to adequately
        inform them of attempts to steal their personal data through the sending
        of informative emails or SMS, while merely posting in a section rather
        than on a central banner (as it later did) does not constitute adequate
        information such that it meets the requirement of protecting its
        customers and the increased safeguarding of their interests. Although
        the plaintiff acted promptly and informed the defendant on the same day
        about the contested incident, the defendant did not act as promptly
        regarding the investigation of the incident and the freezing of the
        account that held the fraudulent credit to prevent the plaintiff's loss,
        but only returned part of the funds to the plaintiff a month later. This
        behavior, beyond being culpable due to gross negligence, was also
        unlawful, as it would have been illegal even without the contractual
        relationship, as contrary to the provisions of Law 4537/2018 and Law
        2251/1994, regarding the lack of security of the services that the
        consumer is legitimately entitled to expect, as well as the building of
        trust that is essential in banking transactions, elements that it was
        obligated to provide within the sphere of the services offered, and
        contrary to the principles of good faith and commercial ethics, as
        crystallized in the provision of Article 288 of the Civil Code, as well
        as the general duty imposed by Article 914 of the Civil Code not to
        cause harm to another culpably. This resulted not only in positive
        damage to the plaintiff but also in causing him moral harm consisting of
        his mental distress and the disruption, agitation, and sorrow he
        experienced, for which he must be awarded financial compensation. Taking
        into account all the general circumstances of the case, the extent of
        the plaintiff's damage, the severity of the defendant's fault, the
        mental distress suffered by the plaintiff, the insecurity he felt
        regarding his deposits, the sorrow he experienced, and the stress caused
        by his financial loss, which occurred during the pandemic period when
        his earnings from his professional activity had significantly decreased,
        as well as the financial and social situation of the parties, it is the
        court's opinion that he should be granted, as financial compensation for
        his moral harm, an amount of €250.00, which is deemed reasonable and
        fair. Therefore, the total monetary amount that the plaintiff is
        entitled to for his positive damage and financial compensation for the
        moral harm suffered amounts to a total of (€703.18 + €250.00) = €953.18.
      - >
        Failure to notify the Authority of file establishment or permit changes
        is punished by up to three years’ imprisonment and a fine of one to five
        million Drachmas.

        Maintaining a file without a permit or violating permit terms is
        punished by at least one year’s imprisonment and a fine of one to five
        million Drachmas.

        Unauthorized file interconnection or without permit is punished by up to
        three years’ imprisonment and a fine of one to five million Drachmas.

        Unlawful interference with personal data is punished by imprisonment and
        a fine; for sensitive data, at least one year’s imprisonment and a fine
        of one to ten million Drachmas.

        Controllers who fail to comply with Authority decisions or violate data
        transfer rules face at least two years’ imprisonment and a fine of one
        to five million Drachmas.

        If acts were committed for unlawful benefit or to cause harm, punishment
        is up to ten years’ imprisonment and a fine of two to ten million
        Drachmas.

        If acts jeopardize democratic governance or national security,
        punishment is confinement in a penitentiary and a fine of five to ten
        million Drachmas.

        Acts committed due to negligence result in at least three months’
        imprisonment and a fine.

        If the Controller is not a natural person, the responsible party is the
        representative or head of the organization with administrative or
        managerial duties.

        Authorized members of the Authority may carry out preliminary
        investigations even without Prosecutor’s order for certain offenses.

        The Authority's President must notify the Public Prosecutor of any
        offenses under investigation, forwarding all relevant evidence.

        Preliminary investigations must conclude within two months of charges,
        and trial must begin within three months of completion.

        Continuation of proceedings is allowed only once and for extremely
        important reasons, with adjournment not exceeding two months.

        Felonies under this law fall under the jurisdiction of the Court of
        Appeal.
  - source_sentence: Who must facilitate the exercise of data subject rights?
    sentences:
      - >-
        1.Processing of personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin,
        political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, or trade union
        membership, and the processing of genetic data, biometric data for the
        purpose of uniquely identifying a natural person, data concerning health
        or data concerning a natural person's sex life or sexual orientation
        shall be prohibited.

        2.Paragraph 1 shall not apply if one of the following applies: (a)  the
        data subject has given explicit consent to the processing of those
        personal data for one or more specified purposes, except where Union or
        Member State law provide that the prohibition referred to in paragraph 1
        may not be lifted by the data subject; (b)  processing is necessary for
        the purposes of carrying out the obligations and exercising specific
        rights of the controller or of the data subject in the field of
        employment and social security and social protection law in so far as it
        is authorised by Union or Member State law or a collective agreement
        pursuant to Member State law providing for appropriate safeguards for
        the fundamental rights and the interests of the data subject; (c) 
        processing is necessary to protect the vital interests of the data
        subject or of another natural person where the data subject is
        physically or legally incapable of giving consent; (d)  processing is
        carried out in the course of its legitimate activities with appropriate
        safeguards by a foundation, association or any other not-for-profit body
        with a political, philosophical, religious or trade union aim and on
        condition that the processing relates solely to the members or to former
        members of the body or to persons who have regular contact with it in
        connection with its purposes and that the personal data are not
        disclosed outside that body without the consent of the data subjects;
        (e)  processing relates to personal data which are manifestly made
        public by the data subject; (f)  processing is necessary for the
        establishment, exercise or defence of legal claims or whenever courts
        are acting in their judicial capacity; (g)  processing is necessary for
        reasons of substantial public interest, on the basis of Union or Member
        State law which shall be proportionate to the aim pursued, respect the
        essence of the right to data protection and provide for suitable and
        specific measures to safeguard the fundamental rights and the interests
        of the data subject; (h)  processing is necessary for the purposes of
        preventive or occupational medicine, for the assessment of the working
        capacity of the employee, medical diagnosis, the provision of health or
        social care or treatment or the management of health or social care
        systems and services on the basis of Union or Member State law or
        pursuant to contract with a health professional and subject to the
        conditions and safeguards referred to in paragraph 3; (i)  processing is
        necessary for reasons of public interest in the area of public health,
        such as protecting against serious cross-border threats to health or
        ensuring high standards of quality and safety of health care and of
        medicinal products or medical devices, on the basis of Union or Member
        State law which provides for suitable and specific measures to safeguard
        the rights and freedoms of the data subject, in particular professional
        secrecy; 4.5.2016 L 119/38   (j)  processing is necessary for archiving
        purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research
        purposes or statistical purposes in accordance with Article 89(1) based
        on Union or Member State law which shall be proportionate to the aim
        pursued, respect the essence of the right to data protection and provide
        for suitable and specific measures to safeguard the fundamental rights
        and the interests of the data subject.

        3.Personal data referred to in paragraph 1 may be processed for the
        purposes referred to in point (h) of paragraph 2 when those data are
        processed by or under the responsibility of a professional subject to
        the obligation of professional secrecy under Union or Member State law
        or rules established by national competent bodies or by another person
        also subject to an obligation of secrecy under Union or Member State law
        or rules established by national competent bodies.

        4.Member States may maintain or introduce further conditions, including
        limitations, with regard to the processing of genetic data, biometric
        data or data concerning health.
      - >-
        Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council
        (2) applies to the processing of personal data by the Union
        institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Regulation (EC) No 45/2001
        and other Union legal acts applicable to such processing of personal
        data should be adapted to the principles and rules established in this
        Regulation and applied in the light of this Regulation. In order to
        provide a strong and coherent data protection framework in the Union,
        the necessary adaptations of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 should follow
        after the adoption of this Regulation, in order to allow application at
        the same time as this Regulation.
      - >-
        1.The controller shall take appropriate measures to provide any
        information referred to in Articles 13 and 14 and any communication
        under Articles 15 to 22 and 34 relating to processing to the data
        subject in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible
        form, using clear and plain language, in particular for any information
        addressed specifically to a child. The information shall be provided in
        writing, or by other means, including, where appropriate, by electronic
        means. When requested by the data subject, the information may be
        provided orally, provided that the identity of the data subject is
        proven by other means. 4.5.2016 L 119/39  

        2.The controller shall facilitate the exercise of data subject rights
        under Articles 15 to 22. In the cases referred to in Article 11(2), the
        controller shall not refuse to act on the request of the data subject
        for exercising his or her rights under Articles 15 to 22, unless the
        controller demonstrates that it is not in a position to identify the
        data subject.

        3.The controller shall provide information on action taken on a request
        under Articles 15 to 22 to the data subject without undue delay and in
        any event within one month of receipt of the request. That period may be
        extended by two further months where necessary, taking into account the
        complexity and number of the requests. The controller shall inform the
        data subject of any such extension within one month of receipt of the
        request, together with the reasons for the delay. Where the data subject
        makes the request by electronic form means, the information shall be
        provided by electronic means where possible, unless otherwise requested
        by the data subject.

        4.If the controller does not take action on the request of the data
        subject, the controller shall inform the data subject without delay and
        at the latest within one month of receipt of the request of the reasons
        for not taking action and on the possibility of lodging a complaint with
        a supervisory authority and seeking a judicial remedy.

        5.Information provided under Articles 13 and 14 and any communication
        and any actions taken under Articles 15 to 22 and 34 shall be provided
        free of charge. Where requests from a data subject are manifestly
        unfounded or excessive, in particular because of their repetitive
        character, the controller may either: (a)  charge a reasonable fee
        taking into account the administrative costs of providing the
        information or communication or taking the action requested; or (b) 
        refuse to act on the request. The controller shall bear the burden of
        demonstrating the manifestly unfounded or excessive character of the
        request.

        6.Without prejudice to Article 11, where the controller has reasonable
        doubts concerning the identity of the natural person making the request
        referred to in Articles 15 to 21, the controller may request the
        provision of additional information necessary to confirm the identity of
        the data subject.

        7.The information to be provided to data subjects pursuant to Articles
        13 and 14 may be provided in combination with standardised icons in
        order to give in an easily visible, intelligible and clearly legible
        manner a meaningful overview of the intended processing. Where the icons
        are presented electronically they shall be machine-readable.

        8.The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in
        accordance with Article 92 for the purpose of determining the
        information to be presented by the icons and the procedures for
        providing standardised icons. Section 2 Information and access to
        personal data
pipeline_tag: sentence-similarity
library_name: sentence-transformers
metrics:
  - cosine_accuracy@1
  - cosine_accuracy@3
  - cosine_accuracy@5
  - cosine_accuracy@10
  - cosine_precision@1
  - cosine_precision@3
  - cosine_precision@5
  - cosine_precision@10
  - cosine_recall@1
  - cosine_recall@3
  - cosine_recall@5
  - cosine_recall@10
  - cosine_ndcg@10
  - cosine_mrr@10
  - cosine_map@100
model-index:
  - name: multilingual-e5-large
    results:
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 1024
          type: dim_1024
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.4180537772087068
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.42189500640204863
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.4500640204865557
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.49039692701664533
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.4180537772087068
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.4163465642338881
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.4043533930857874
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.36869398207426374
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.04734422767263886
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.138064233626932
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.2069980430010945
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.308531274625124
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.44178501209869797
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.42985717334308843
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.506794523350519
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 768
          type: dim_768
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.41037131882202305
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.4142125480153649
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.44430217669654287
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.4833546734955186
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.41037131882202305
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.4086641058472044
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.3969270166453265
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.36165172855313704
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.047186779325657804
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.1375709294981283
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.20603724780478358
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.30540044861465576
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.4349862241563486
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.4224889742495374
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.500478306774528
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 512
          type: dim_512
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.4065300896286812
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.41229193341869397
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.44494238156209986
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.4814340588988476
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.4065300896286812
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.4054630815194195
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.3947503201024327
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.3596030729833547
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.047372341735862133
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.1383106496582531
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.20757258542171747
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.3071623578952262
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.4329095460408428
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.41950236774180394
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.49555759572196095
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 256
          type: dim_256
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.38348271446862997
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.3886043533930858
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.4206145966709347
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.4551856594110115
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.38348271446862997
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.382202304737516
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.3718309859154929
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.33886043533930854
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.04466034705404223
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.1301795023253766
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.19500340584044382
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.2892016292717267
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.4087462230477571
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.3957850639188662
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.4709582085612654
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 128
          type: dim_128
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.34699103713188223
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.35147247119078107
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.37900128040973113
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.4212548015364917
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.34699103713188223
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.34571062740076824
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.3352112676056338
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.3042893725992318
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.04217848526747235
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.12288848071178002
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.18344012521240954
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.2706183968947745
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.37139192897263235
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.35916305916305874
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.4338211299784659
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 64
          type: dim_64
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.3207426376440461
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.322663252240717
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.3405889884763124
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.3725992317541613
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.3207426376440461
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.3188220230473751
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.3088348271446863
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.2797055057618438
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.036318765090758674
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.10562189493083342
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.15867125525021739
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.23840960718091392
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.3371953828075091
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.32884732638253733
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.3933467041096336
            name: Cosine Map@100

multilingual-e5-large

This is a sentence-transformers model finetuned from intfloat/multilingual-e5-large. It maps sentences & paragraphs to a 1024-dimensional dense vector space and can be used for semantic textual similarity, semantic search, paraphrase mining, text classification, clustering, and more.

Model Details

Model Description

Model Type: Sentence Transformer
Base model: intfloat/multilingual-e5-large
Maximum Sequence Length: 512 tokens
Output Dimensionality: 1024 dimensions
Similarity Function: Cosine Similarity
Language: en
License: apache-2.0

Model Sources

Documentation: Sentence Transformers Documentation
Repository: Sentence Transformers on GitHub
Hugging Face: Sentence Transformers on Hugging Face

Full Model Architecture

SentenceTransformer(
  (0): Transformer({'max_seq_length': 512, 'do_lower_case': False, 'architecture': 'XLMRobertaModel'})
  (1): Pooling({'word_embedding_dimension': 1024, 'pooling_mode_cls_token': False, 'pooling_mode_mean_tokens': True, 'pooling_mode_max_tokens': False, 'pooling_mode_mean_sqrt_len_tokens': False, 'pooling_mode_weightedmean_tokens': False, 'pooling_mode_lasttoken': False, 'include_prompt': True})
  (2): Normalize()
)

Usage

Direct Usage (Sentence Transformers)

First install the Sentence Transformers library:

pip install -U sentence-transformers

Then you can load this model and run inference.

from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer

# Download from the 🤗 Hub
model = SentenceTransformer("sentence_transformers_model_id")
# Run inference
sentences = [
    'Who must facilitate the exercise of data subject rights?',
    '1.The controller shall take appropriate measures to provide any information referred to in Articles 13 and 14 and any communication under Articles 15 to 22 and 34 relating to processing to the data subject in a concise, transparent, intelligible and easily accessible form, using clear and plain language, in particular for any information addressed specifically to a child. The information shall be provided in writing, or by other means, including, where appropriate, by electronic means. When requested by the data subject, the information may be provided orally, provided that the identity of the data subject is proven by other means. 4.5.2016 L 119/39  \n2.The controller shall facilitate the exercise of data subject rights under Articles 15 to 22. In the cases referred to in Article 11(2), the controller shall not refuse to act on the request of the data subject for exercising his or her rights under Articles 15 to 22, unless the controller demonstrates that it is not in a position to identify the data subject.\n3.The controller shall provide information on action taken on a request under Articles 15 to 22 to the data subject without undue delay and in any event within one month of receipt of the request. That period may be extended by two further months where necessary, taking into account the complexity and number of the requests. The controller shall inform the data subject of any such extension within one month of receipt of the request, together with the reasons for the delay. Where the data subject makes the request by electronic form means, the information shall be provided by electronic means where possible, unless otherwise requested by the data subject.\n4.If the controller does not take action on the request of the data subject, the controller shall inform the data subject without delay and at the latest within one month of receipt of the request of the reasons for not taking action and on the possibility of lodging a complaint with a supervisory authority and seeking a judicial remedy.\n5.Information provided under Articles 13 and 14 and any communication and any actions taken under Articles 15 to 22 and 34 shall be provided free of charge. Where requests from a data subject are manifestly unfounded or excessive, in particular because of their repetitive character, the controller may either: (a)  charge a reasonable fee taking into account the administrative costs of providing the information or communication or taking the action requested; or (b)  refuse to act on the request. The controller shall bear the burden of demonstrating the manifestly unfounded or excessive character of the request.\n6.Without prejudice to Article 11, where the controller has reasonable doubts concerning the identity of the natural person making the request referred to in Articles 15 to 21, the controller may request the provision of additional information necessary to confirm the identity of the data subject.\n7.The information to be provided to data subjects pursuant to Articles 13 and 14 may be provided in combination with standardised icons in order to give in an easily visible, intelligible and clearly legible manner a meaningful overview of the intended processing. Where the icons are presented electronically they shall be machine-readable.\n8.The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 92 for the purpose of determining the information to be presented by the icons and the procedures for providing standardised icons. Section 2 Information and access to personal data',
    'Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2) applies to the processing of personal data by the Union institutions, bodies, offices and agencies. Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 and other Union legal acts applicable to such processing of personal data should be adapted to the principles and rules established in this Regulation and applied in the light of this Regulation. In order to provide a strong and coherent data protection framework in the Union, the necessary adaptations of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 should follow after the adoption of this Regulation, in order to allow application at the same time as this Regulation.',
]
embeddings = model.encode(sentences)
print(embeddings.shape)
# [3, 1024]

# Get the similarity scores for the embeddings
similarities = model.similarity(embeddings, embeddings)
print(similarities)
# tensor([[1.0000, 0.5748, 0.4790],
#         [0.5748, 1.0000, 0.3993],
#         [0.4790, 0.3993, 1.0000]])

Evaluation

Metrics

Information Retrieval

Dataset: dim_1024
Evaluated with InformationRetrievalEvaluator with these parameters:
```
{
    "truncate_dim": 1024
}
```

Metric	Value
cosine_accuracy@1	0.4181
cosine_accuracy@3	0.4219
cosine_accuracy@5	0.4501
cosine_accuracy@10	0.4904
cosine_precision@1	0.4181
cosine_precision@3	0.4163
cosine_precision@5	0.4044
cosine_precision@10	0.3687
cosine_recall@1	0.0473
cosine_recall@3	0.1381
cosine_recall@5	0.207
cosine_recall@10	0.3085
cosine_ndcg@10	0.4418
cosine_mrr@10	0.4299
cosine_map@100	0.5068

Information Retrieval

Dataset: dim_768
Evaluated with InformationRetrievalEvaluator with these parameters:
```
{
    "truncate_dim": 768
}
```

Metric	Value
cosine_accuracy@1	0.4104
cosine_accuracy@3	0.4142
cosine_accuracy@5	0.4443
cosine_accuracy@10	0.4834
cosine_precision@1	0.4104
cosine_precision@3	0.4087
cosine_precision@5	0.3969
cosine_precision@10	0.3617
cosine_recall@1	0.0472
cosine_recall@3	0.1376
cosine_recall@5	0.206
cosine_recall@10	0.3054
cosine_ndcg@10	0.435
cosine_mrr@10	0.4225
cosine_map@100	0.5005

Information Retrieval

Dataset: dim_512
Evaluated with InformationRetrievalEvaluator with these parameters:
```
{
    "truncate_dim": 512
}
```

Metric	Value
cosine_accuracy@1	0.4065
cosine_accuracy@3	0.4123
cosine_accuracy@5	0.4449
cosine_accuracy@10	0.4814
cosine_precision@1	0.4065
cosine_precision@3	0.4055
cosine_precision@5	0.3948
cosine_precision@10	0.3596
cosine_recall@1	0.0474
cosine_recall@3	0.1383
cosine_recall@5	0.2076
cosine_recall@10	0.3072
cosine_ndcg@10	0.4329
cosine_mrr@10	0.4195
cosine_map@100	0.4956

Information Retrieval

Dataset: dim_256
Evaluated with InformationRetrievalEvaluator with these parameters:
```
{
    "truncate_dim": 256
}
```

Metric	Value
cosine_accuracy@1	0.3835
cosine_accuracy@3	0.3886
cosine_accuracy@5	0.4206
cosine_accuracy@10	0.4552
cosine_precision@1	0.3835
cosine_precision@3	0.3822
cosine_precision@5	0.3718
cosine_precision@10	0.3389
cosine_recall@1	0.0447
cosine_recall@3	0.1302
cosine_recall@5	0.195
cosine_recall@10	0.2892
cosine_ndcg@10	0.4087
cosine_mrr@10	0.3958
cosine_map@100	0.471

Information Retrieval

Dataset: dim_128
Evaluated with InformationRetrievalEvaluator with these parameters:
```
{
    "truncate_dim": 128
}
```

Metric	Value
cosine_accuracy@1	0.347
cosine_accuracy@3	0.3515
cosine_accuracy@5	0.379
cosine_accuracy@10	0.4213
cosine_precision@1	0.347
cosine_precision@3	0.3457
cosine_precision@5	0.3352
cosine_precision@10	0.3043
cosine_recall@1	0.0422
cosine_recall@3	0.1229
cosine_recall@5	0.1834
cosine_recall@10	0.2706
cosine_ndcg@10	0.3714
cosine_mrr@10	0.3592
cosine_map@100	0.4338

Information Retrieval

Dataset: dim_64
Evaluated with InformationRetrievalEvaluator with these parameters:
```
{
    "truncate_dim": 64
}
```

Metric	Value
cosine_accuracy@1	0.3207
cosine_accuracy@3	0.3227
cosine_accuracy@5	0.3406
cosine_accuracy@10	0.3726
cosine_precision@1	0.3207
cosine_precision@3	0.3188
cosine_precision@5	0.3088
cosine_precision@10	0.2797
cosine_recall@1	0.0363
cosine_recall@3	0.1056
cosine_recall@5	0.1587
cosine_recall@10	0.2384
cosine_ndcg@10	0.3372
cosine_mrr@10	0.3288
cosine_map@100	0.3933

Training Details

Training Dataset

Unnamed Dataset

Size: 391 training samples
Columns: anchor and positive
Approximate statistics based on the first 391 samples:
anchor positive
type string string
details
min: 8 tokens
mean: 17.16 tokens
max: 32 tokens

min: 27 tokens
mean: 377.93 tokens
max: 512 tokens

	anchor	positive
type	string	string
details	min: 8 tokens mean: 17.16 tokens max: 32 tokens	min: 27 tokens mean: 377.93 tokens max: 512 tokens

Samples:

anchor	positive
`What measures must be taken according to Article 32?`	1.Where processing is to be carried out on behalf of a controller, the controller shall use only processors providing sufficient guarantees to implement appropriate technical and organisational measures in such a manner that processing will meet the requirements of this Regulation and ensure the protection of the rights of the data subject. 2.The processor shall not engage another processor without prior specific or general written authorisation of the controller. In the case of general written authorisation, the processor shall inform the controller of any intended changes concerning the addition or replacement of other processors, thereby giving the controller the opportunity to object to such changes. 3.Processing by a processor shall be governed by a contract or other legal act under Union or Member State law, that is binding on the processor with regard to the controller and that sets out the subject-matter and duration of the processing, the nature and purpose of the processing, ...
`What is the responsibility of assisting and advising the data subjects in exercising their rights?`	1.A transfer of personal data to a third country or an international organisation may take place where the Commission has decided that the third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within that third country, or the international organisation in question ensures an adequate level of protection. Such a transfer shall not require any specific authorisation. 2.When assessing the adequacy of the level of protection, the Commission shall, in particular, take account of the following elements: (a) the rule of law, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, relevant legislation, both general and sectoral, including concerning public security, defence, national security and criminal law and the access of public authorities to personal data, as well as the implementation of such legislation, data protection rules, professional rules and security measures, including rules for the onward transfer of personal data to another third country or international organisation whi...
`What should Member States be authorized to provide for regarding personal data processing for archiving purposes?`	Where personal data are processed for archiving purposes, this Regulation should also apply to that processing, bearing in mind that this Regulation should not apply to deceased persons. Public authorities or public or private bodies that hold records of public interest should be services which, pursuant to Union or Member State law, have a legal obligation to acquire, preserve, appraise, arrange, describe, communicate, promote, disseminate and provide access to records of enduring value for general public interest. Member States should also be authorised to provide for the further processing of personal data for archiving purposes, for example with a view to providing specific information related to the political behaviour under former totalitarian state regimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, in particular the Holocaust, or war crimes. 4.5.2016 L 119/29 Official Journal of the European Union EN

Loss: MatryoshkaLoss with these parameters:

{
    "loss": "MultipleNegativesRankingLoss",
    "matryoshka_dims": [
        1024,
        768,
        512,
        256,
        128,
        64
    ],
    "matryoshka_weights": [
        1,
        1,
        1,
        1,
        1,
        1
    ],
    "n_dims_per_step": -1
}

Training Hyperparameters

Non-Default Hyperparameters

eval_strategy: epoch
per_device_eval_batch_size: 16
gradient_accumulation_steps: 4
learning_rate: 2e-05
num_train_epochs: 20
lr_scheduler_type: cosine
warmup_ratio: 0.1
bf16: True
load_best_model_at_end: True
optim: adamw_torch_fused
batch_sampler: no_duplicates

All Hyperparameters

Click to expand

overwrite_output_dir: False
do_predict: False
eval_strategy: epoch
prediction_loss_only: True
per_device_train_batch_size: 8
per_device_eval_batch_size: 16
per_gpu_train_batch_size: None
per_gpu_eval_batch_size: None
gradient_accumulation_steps: 4
eval_accumulation_steps: None
torch_empty_cache_steps: None
learning_rate: 2e-05
weight_decay: 0.0
adam_beta1: 0.9
adam_beta2: 0.999
adam_epsilon: 1e-08
max_grad_norm: 1.0
num_train_epochs: 20
max_steps: -1
lr_scheduler_type: cosine
lr_scheduler_kwargs: {}
warmup_ratio: 0.1
warmup_steps: 0
log_level: passive
log_level_replica: warning
log_on_each_node: True
logging_nan_inf_filter: True
save_safetensors: True
save_on_each_node: False
save_only_model: False
restore_callback_states_from_checkpoint: False
no_cuda: False
use_cpu: False
use_mps_device: False
seed: 42
data_seed: None
jit_mode_eval: False
use_ipex: False
bf16: True
fp16: False
fp16_opt_level: O1
half_precision_backend: auto
bf16_full_eval: False
fp16_full_eval: False
tf32: None
local_rank: 0
ddp_backend: None
tpu_num_cores: None
tpu_metrics_debug: False
debug: []
dataloader_drop_last: False
dataloader_num_workers: 0
dataloader_prefetch_factor: None
past_index: -1
disable_tqdm: False
remove_unused_columns: True
label_names: None
load_best_model_at_end: True
ignore_data_skip: False
fsdp: []
fsdp_min_num_params: 0
fsdp_config: {'min_num_params': 0, 'xla': False, 'xla_fsdp_v2': False, 'xla_fsdp_grad_ckpt': False}
tp_size: 0
fsdp_transformer_layer_cls_to_wrap: None
accelerator_config: {'split_batches': False, 'dispatch_batches': None, 'even_batches': True, 'use_seedable_sampler': True, 'non_blocking': False, 'gradient_accumulation_kwargs': None}
deepspeed: None
label_smoothing_factor: 0.0
optim: adamw_torch_fused
optim_args: None
adafactor: False
group_by_length: False
length_column_name: length
ddp_find_unused_parameters: None
ddp_bucket_cap_mb: None
ddp_broadcast_buffers: False
dataloader_pin_memory: True
dataloader_persistent_workers: False
skip_memory_metrics: True
use_legacy_prediction_loop: False
push_to_hub: False
resume_from_checkpoint: None
hub_model_id: None
hub_strategy: every_save
hub_private_repo: None
hub_always_push: False
gradient_checkpointing: False
gradient_checkpointing_kwargs: None
include_inputs_for_metrics: False
include_for_metrics: []
eval_do_concat_batches: True
fp16_backend: auto
push_to_hub_model_id: None
push_to_hub_organization: None
mp_parameters:
auto_find_batch_size: False
full_determinism: False
torchdynamo: None
ray_scope: last
ddp_timeout: 1800
torch_compile: False
torch_compile_backend: None
torch_compile_mode: None
include_tokens_per_second: False
include_num_input_tokens_seen: False
neftune_noise_alpha: None
optim_target_modules: None
batch_eval_metrics: False
eval_on_start: False
use_liger_kernel: False
eval_use_gather_object: False
average_tokens_across_devices: False
prompts: None
batch_sampler: no_duplicates
multi_dataset_batch_sampler: proportional
router_mapping: {}
learning_rate_mapping: {}

Training Logs

Epoch	Step	Training Loss	dim_1024_cosine_ndcg@10	dim_768_cosine_ndcg@10	dim_512_cosine_ndcg@10	dim_256_cosine_ndcg@10	dim_128_cosine_ndcg@10	dim_64_cosine_ndcg@10
0.8163	10	31.5155	-	-	-	-	-	-
1.0	13	-	0.4494	0.4446	0.4364	0.3947	0.3362	0.2621
1.5714	20	19.0409	-	-	-	-	-	-
2.0	26	-	0.4065	0.4004	0.4013	0.3692	0.3418	0.2882
2.3265	30	14.5314	-	-	-	-	-	-
3.0	39	-	0.4418	0.4350	0.4329	0.4087	0.3714	0.3372

Framework Versions

Python: 3.12.11
Sentence Transformers: 5.1.0
Transformers: 4.51.3
PyTorch: 2.8.0+cu126
Accelerate: 1.10.1
Datasets: 4.0.0
Tokenizers: 0.21.4

Citation

BibTeX

Sentence Transformers

@inproceedings{reimers-2019-sentence-bert,
    title = "Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks",
    author = "Reimers, Nils and Gurevych, Iryna",
    booktitle = "Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing",
    month = "11",
    year = "2019",
    publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
    url = "https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.10084",
}

MatryoshkaLoss

@misc{kusupati2024matryoshka,
    title={Matryoshka Representation Learning},
    author={Aditya Kusupati and Gantavya Bhatt and Aniket Rege and Matthew Wallingford and Aditya Sinha and Vivek Ramanujan and William Howard-Snyder and Kaifeng Chen and Sham Kakade and Prateek Jain and Ali Farhadi},
    year={2024},
    eprint={2205.13147},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    primaryClass={cs.LG}
}

MultipleNegativesRankingLoss

@misc{henderson2017efficient,
    title={Efficient Natural Language Response Suggestion for Smart Reply},
    author={Matthew Henderson and Rami Al-Rfou and Brian Strope and Yun-hsuan Sung and Laszlo Lukacs and Ruiqi Guo and Sanjiv Kumar and Balint Miklos and Ray Kurzweil},
    year={2017},
    eprint={1705.00652},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    primaryClass={cs.CL}
}