mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Benchmarking Patent Embeddings: A Multi-Task Evaluation of 22 Models Across Retrieval, Classification, and Clustering

arXiv 2605.24297 ↗First posted 22 May 2026cs.IR cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Two questions regarding practitioners' use of patent embeddings arise: (i) Does one fine-tuning recipe suffice for all downstream applications? (ii) Is fine-tuning on one patent landscape sufficient for downstream application on other landscapes? By evaluating 22 pre-trained embedding models (ranging from 22M to 12B parameters) on three tasks -- information retrieval, classification, and clustering -- on 113,148 WIPO patents for assistive technology (46,069 citation queries) and on an external DAPFAM dataset, we find that two results cast doubt on the prevailing wisdom. (i) The optimal fine-tuning recipe depends on the downstream task: cross-sectional alignment (recipe R3) provides the largest improvements to retrieval performance (+7.1% nDCG@10), whereas a combined signal recipe (recipe R4) is better suited to classification (+7.1 F1) and clustering (+10.9 V-measure); a matched data control confirms that differences in training dataset size are not a contributing factor. (ii) Single-landscape fine-tuning hampers cross-landscape information retrieval: fine-tuning on one landscape significantly degrades cross-domain retrieval for 5 of 8 model-recipe combinations on the DAPFAM corpus, with the stronger zero-shot models suffering most. While within-family scaling is consistent (Qwen3 0.6B->4B->8B; Llama-Nemotron 1B->8B), cross-family scaling is erratic; the 12B KaLM-Gemma3 is ranked 8th on TAC retrieval performance, following prefix modification. Title+Abstract+Claims is the ubiquitous best text view, and all models suffer from a 55-65% gap between IN and OUT-of-domain performance which cannot be mitigated by hybrid BM25-dense fusion. Code and evaluation framework are publicly available.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 May 2026.

Builds on

17 of 44 references.

References · 17

  1. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  2. 2020MiniLM: Deep Self-Attention Distillation for Task-Agnostic Compression of Pre-Trained Transformerscited by 1,463
  3. 2022Text Embeddings by Weakly-Supervised Contrastive Pre-trainingcited by 1,253
  4. 2021BEIR: A Heterogenous Benchmark for Zero-shot Evaluation of Information Retrieval Modelscited by 1,252
  5. 2020ColBERT: Efficient and Effective Passage Search via Contextualized Late Interaction over BERTcited by 1,178
  6. 2024M3-Embedding: Multi-Linguality, Multi-Functionality, Multi-Granularity Text Embeddings Through Self-Knowledge Distillationcited by 1,073
  7. 2023Towards General Text Embeddings with Multi-stage Contrastive Learningcited by 723
  8. 2021ColBERTv2: Effective and Efficient Retrieval via Lightweight Late Interactioncited by 476
  9. 2024Nomic Embed: Training a Reproducible Long Context Text Embeddercited by 265
  10. 2020On the Stability of Fine-tuning BERT: Misconceptions, Explanations, and Strong Baselinescited by 255
  11. 2021Scaling Deep Contrastive Learning Batch Size under Memory Limited Setupcited by 127
  12. 2025KaLM-Embedding: Superior Training Data Brings A Stronger Embedding Modelcited by 36
5 more
  1. 2024Natural Language Processing in the Patent Domain: A Surveycited by 20
  2. 2024A Survey on Patent Analysis: From NLP to Multimodal AIcited by 10
  3. 2024A comparative analysis of embedding models for patent similaritycited by 3
  4. 2025IPBench: Benchmarking the Knowledge of Large Language Models in Intellectual Propertycited by 3
  5. 2026Large Language Models, Encoder Architectures and Hybrid Approaches for Patent Classificationcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.