AgriJev: Efficient Agricultural Candidate Scoring with Multi-Scale Adapted Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Agricultural systems make decisions over heterogeneous entity types, textual judgments, and knowledge-question options. Generating a textual answer adds decoding and extraction steps to decisions that ultimately require a candidate choice. We introduce AgriJev, a family of adapted Qwen3.5 models at 0.8B, 2B, 4B, and 9B. A shared interface conditions on agricultural text, a judgment question, and candidate definitions, returning scores and relative probabilities in one forward call. We prepare source-aware training records and frozen evaluations from existing agricultural resources, retaining original groups and annotation provenance. Comparisons include original Qwen3.5 models and matched agricultural SFT models, both evaluated through native answer generation. Across 17 external test views, AgriJev-9B reaches 75.44% mean accuracy, exceeding the original and SFT generators by 5.89 and 3.79 percentage points. It outperforms the original generator on 13 views and narrows the mean gap to hosted Jev 1.13.0. On a fixed A100 workload, its median scoring latency is approximately half that of same-scale answer generation. Task-dependent gains and failures characterize a practical choice among agricultural model weights and inference contracts.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Oct 2026.
Builds on
22 of 39 references.
References · 22
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2020Don't Stop Pretraining: Adapt Language Models to Domains and Taskscited by 1,565
- 2020Making Pre-trained Language Models Better Few-shot Learnerscited by 1,256
- 2020Exploiting Cloze Questions for Few Shot Text Classification and Natural Language Inferencecited by 938
- 2023C-Eval: A Multi-Level Multi-Discipline Chinese Evaluation Suite for Foundation Modelscited by 708
- 2023C-Pack: Packed Resources For General Chinese Embeddingscited by 578
- 2023Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectorscited by 486
- 2023CMMLU: Measuring massive multitask language understanding in Chinesecited by 449
- 2019Benchmarking Zero-shot Text Classification: Datasets, Evaluation and Entailment Approachcited by 308
- 2020Revisiting Pre-Trained Models for Chinese Natural Language Processingcited by 266
- 2023Symbol tuning improves in-context learning in language modelscited by 75
10 more
- 2023Did You Read the Instructions? Rethinking the Effectiveness of Task Definitions in Instruction Learningcited by 41
- 2024Strengthened Symbol Binding Makes Large Language Models Reliable Multiple-Choice Selectorscited by 15
- 2025GLiClass: Generalist Lightweight Model for Sequence Classification Taskscited by 15
- 2022Zero-Shot Learners for Natural Language Understanding via a Unified Multiple Choice Perspectivecited by 14
- 2023ChatAgri: Exploring Potentials of ChatGPT on Cross-linguistic Agricultural Text Classificationcited by 14
- 2024An Improved Traditional Chinese Evaluation Suite for Foundation Modelcited by 13
- 2025SeedBench: A Multi-task Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Models in Seed Sciencecited by 10
- 2022AgAsk: An Agent to Help Answer Farmer's Questions From Scientific Documentscited by 9
- 2025BhashaBench V1: A Comprehensive Benchmark for the Quadrant of Indic Domainscited by 7
- 2025Do LLMs Adhere to Label Definitions? Examining Their Receptivity to External Label Definitionscited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.