mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Grounding Text Embeddings in Stakeholder Associations

arXiv 2605.27168 ↗First posted 26 May 2026cs.CL cs.AI cs.CYcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Text embeddings are widely used to analyse large corpora of complex texts. However, it is unclear whether the embeddings capture the same semantic distances as the human experts using them. Ensuring alignment between embedding representations and human intentions is essential for valid analyses. We present the Stakeholder Grounding Exercise, a method for making expert associations explicit and grounding embedding model results in human understanding. In our primary case study on Danish policy issues, we find that neural text embeddings are substantially less reliable than human experts (19-26 pp gap), and that this misalignment propagates to downstream clustering performance (Spearman ρ=0.9 between exercise ranking and cluster quality). A secondary study on US Federal AI use cases replicates the gap (16pp) in English, using a digital protocol and a different community of experts -- demonstrating that the gap is not an artefact of a single instrument or domain. The Stakeholder Grounding Exercise offers a practical method for assessing whether embedding models capture the semantic distinctions that matter most to domain experts.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 71 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2026.

Builds on

24 of 71 references.

References · 24

  1. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  2. 2019Unsupervised Cross-lingual Representation Learning at Scalecited by 3,935
  3. 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,312
  4. 2024M3-Embedding: Multi-Linguality, Multi-Functionality, Multi-Granularity Text Embeddings Through Self-Knowledge Distillationcited by 1,073
  5. 2020Language-agnostic BERT Sentence Embeddingcited by 627
  6. 2024Multilingual E5 Text Embeddings: A Technical Reportcited by 372
  7. 2022One Embedder, Any Task: Instruction-Finetuned Text Embeddingscited by 333
  8. 2019Measurement and Fairnesscited by 308
  9. 2020Data and its (dis)contents: A survey of dataset development and use in machine learning researchcited by 260
  10. 2021What Will it Take to Fix Benchmarking in Natural Language Understanding?cited by 203
  11. 2024Political Compass or Spinning Arrow? Towards More Meaningful Evaluations for Values and Opinions in Large Language Modelscited by 162
  12. 2025EmbeddingGemma: Powerful and Lightweight Text Representationscited by 139
12 more
  1. 2020UnQovering Stereotyping Biases via Underspecified Questionscited by 126
  2. 2025MMTEB: Massive Multilingual Text Embedding Benchmarkcited by 125
  3. 2020Participation is not a Design Fix for Machine Learningcited by 111
  4. 2020A Survey on Text Classification: From Shallow to Deep Learningcited by 80
  5. 2025Position: Evaluating Generative AI Systems Is a Social Science Measurement Challengecited by 63
  6. 2025Measurement to Meaning: A Validity-Centered Framework for AI Evaluationcited by 57
  7. 2022Characteristics of Harmful Text: Towards Rigorous Benchmarking of Language Modelscited by 49
  8. 2025Multilingual != Multicultural: Evaluating Gaps Between Multilingual Capabilities and Cultural Alignment in LLMscited by 39
  9. 2024The Scandinavian Embedding Benchmarks: Comprehensive Assessment of Multilingual and Monolingual Text Embeddingcited by 26
  10. 2017StarSpace: Embed All The Things!cited by 24
  11. 2025HUME: Measuring the Human-Model Performance Gap in Text Embedding Taskscited by 7
  12. 2023Enhancing Interpretability using Human Similarity Judgements to Prune Word Embeddingscited by 6

Built on by

Not cited yet.