Türkçe Dil Modellerinin Performans Karşılaştırması Performance Comparison of Turkish Language Models

Clicks: 17
ID: 283438
2024
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #794 of 803 articles by views in arXiv

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 803 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The developments that language models have provided in fulfilling almost all kinds of tasks have attracted the attention of not only researchers but also the society and have enabled them to become products. There are commercially successful language models available. However, users may prefer open-source language models due to cost, data privacy, or regulations. Yet, despite the increasing number of these models, there is no comprehensive comparison of their performance for Turkish. This study aims to fill this gap in the literature. A comparison is made among seven selected language models based on their contextual learning and question-answering abilities. Turkish datasets for contextual learning and question-answering were prepared, and both automatic and human evaluations were conducted. The results show that for question-answering, continuing pretraining before fine-tuning with instructional datasets is more successful in adapting multilingual models to Turkish and that in-context learning performances do not much related to question-answering performances.
Reference Key
amasyali2024trke Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Eren Dogan; M. Egemen Uzun; Atahan Uz; H. Emre Seyrek; Ahmed Zeer; Ezgi Sevi; H. Toprak Kesgin; M. Kaan Yuce; M. Fatih Amasyali
Journal arXiv
Year 2024
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.