IoannisKat1's picture
Add finetuned model
d862911 verified
metadata
language:
  - en
license: apache-2.0
tags:
  - sentence-transformers
  - sentence-similarity
  - feature-extraction
  - dense
  - generated_from_trainer
  - dataset_size:1580
  - loss:MatryoshkaLoss
  - loss:MultipleNegativesRankingLoss
base_model: nomic-ai/modernbert-embed-base
widget:
  - source_sentence: >-
      Who should inform the lead supervisory authority without delay about the
      matter?
    sentences:
      - >-
        The protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of
        personal data by competent authorities for the purposes of the
        prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences
        or the execution of criminal penalties, including the safeguarding
        against and the prevention of threats to public security and the free
        movement of such data, is the subject of a specific Union legal act.
        This Regulation should not, therefore, apply to processing activities
        for those purposes. However, personal data processed by public
        authorities under this Regulation should, when used for those purposes,
        be governed by a more specific Union legal act, namely Directive (EU)
        2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1). Member
        States may entrust competent authorities within the meaning of Directive
        (EU) 2016/680 with tasks which are not necessarily carried out for the
        purposes of the prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of
        criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, including the
        safeguarding against and prevention of threats to public security, so
        that the processing of personal data for those other purposes, in so far
        as it is within the scope of Union law, falls within the scope of this
        Regulation. With regard to the processing of personal data by those
        competent authorities for purposes falling within scope of this
        Regulation, Member States should be able to maintain or introduce more
        specific provisions to adapt the application of the rules of this
        Regulation. Such provisions may determine more precisely specific
        requirements for the processing of personal data by those competent
        authorities for those other purposes, taking into account the
        constitutional, organisational and administrative structure of the
        respective Member State. When the processing of personal data by private
        bodies falls within the scope of this Regulation, this Regulation should
        provide for the possibility for Member States under specific conditions
        to restrict by law certain obligations and rights when such a
        restriction constitutes a necessary and proportionate measure in a
        democratic society to safeguard specific important interests including
        public security and the prevention, investigation, detection or
        prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties,
        including the safeguarding against and the prevention of threats to
        public security. This is relevant for instance in the framework of
        anti-money laundering or the activities of forensic laboratories.
      - >-
        **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.
      - >-
        Each supervisory authority not acting as the lead supervisory authority
        should be competent to handle local cases where the controller or
        processor is established in more than one Member State, but the subject
        matter of the specific processing concerns only processing carried out
        in a single Member State and involves only data subjects in that single
        Member State, for example, where the subject matter concerns the
        processing of employees' personal data in the specific employment
        context of a Member State. In such cases, the supervisory authority
        should inform the lead supervisory authority without delay about the
        matter. After being informed, the lead supervisory authority should
        decide, whether it will handle the case pursuant to the provision on
        cooperation between the lead supervisory authority and other supervisory
        authorities concerned (‘one-stop-shop mechanism’), or whether the
        supervisory authority which informed it should handle the case at local
        level. When deciding whether it will handle the case, the lead
        supervisory authority should take into account whether there is an
        establishment of the controller or processor in the Member State of the
        supervisory authority which informed it in order to ensure effective
        enforcement of a decision vis-à-vis the controller or processor. Where
        the lead supervisory authority decides to handle the case, the
        supervisory authority which informed it should have the 4.5.2016 L
        119/23 Official Journal of the European Union EN   possibility to submit
        a draft for a decision, of which the lead supervisory authority should
        take utmost account when preparing its draft decision in that
        one-stop-shop mechanism.
  - source_sentence: >-
      Who should provide appropriate safeguards for the processing of personal
      data for archiving purposes?
    sentences:
      - >-
        The processing of personal data for archiving purposes in the public
        interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical
        purposes should be subject to appropriate safeguards for the rights and
        freedoms of the data subject pursuant to this Regulation. Those
        safeguards should ensure that technical and organisational measures are
        in place in order to ensure, in particular, the principle of data
        minimisation. The further processing of personal data for archiving
        purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research
        purposes or statistical purposes is to be carried out when the
        controller has assessed the feasibility to fulfil those purposes by
        processing data which do not permit or no longer permit the
        identification of data subjects, provided that appropriate safeguards
        exist (such as, for instance, pseudonymisation of the data). Member
        States should provide for appropriate safeguards for the processing of
        personal data for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific
        or historical research purposes or statistical purposes. Member States
        should be authorised to provide, under specific conditions and subject
        to appropriate safeguards for data subjects, specifications and
        derogations with regard to the information requirements and rights to
        rectification, to erasure, to be forgotten, to restriction of
        processing, to data portability, and to object when processing personal
        data for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or
        historical research purposes or statistical purposes. The conditions and
        safeguards in question may entail specific procedures for data subjects
        to exercise those rights if this is appropriate in the light of the
        purposes sought by the specific processing along with technical and
        organisational measures aimed at minimising the processing of personal
        data in pursuance of the proportionality and necessity principles. The
        processing of personal data for scientific purposes should also comply
        with other relevant legislation such as on clinical trials.
      - >-
        This Regulation shall not impose additional obligations on natural or
        legal persons in relation to processing in connection with the provision
        of publicly available electronic communications services in public
        communication networks in the Union in relation to matters for which
        they are subject to specific obligations with the same objective set out
        in Directive 2002/58/EC.
      - >-
        1.Where personal data have not been obtained from the data subject, the
        controller shall provide the data subject with the following
        information: (a)  the identity and the contact details of the controller
        and, where applicable, of the controller's representative; (b)  the
        contact details of the data protection officer, where applicable; (c) 
        the purposes of the processing for which the personal data are intended
        as well as the legal basis for the processing; (d)  the categories of
        personal data concerned; (e)  the recipients or categories of recipients
        of the personal data, if any; 4.5.2016 L 119/41   (f) where applicable,
        that the controller intends to transfer personal data to a recipient in
        a third country or international organisation and the existence or
        absence of an adequacy decision by the Commission, or in the case of
        transfers referred to in Article 46 or 47, or the second subparagraph of
        Article 49(1), reference to the appropriate or suitable safeguards and
        the means to obtain a copy of them or where they have been made
        available.

        2.In addition to the information referred to in paragraph 1, the
        controller shall provide the data subject with the following information
        necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing in respect of the
        data subject: (a)  the period for which the personal data will be
        stored, or if that is not possible, the criteria used to determine that
        period; (b)  where the processing is based on point (f) of Article 6(1),
        the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party;
        (c)  the existence of the right to request from the controller access to
        and rectification or erasure of personal data or restriction of
        processing concerning the data subject and to object to processing as
        well as the right to data portability; (d)  where processing is based on
        point (a) of Article 6(1) or point (a) of Article 9(2), the existence of
        the right to withdraw consent at any time, without affecting the
        lawfulness of processing based on consent before its withdrawal; (e) 
        the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority; (f)  from
        which source the personal data originate, and if applicable, whether it
        came from publicly accessible sources; (g)  the existence of automated
        decision-making, including profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and
        (4) and, at least in those cases, meaningful information about the logic
        involved, as well as the significance and the envisaged consequences of
        such processing for the data subject.

        3.The controller shall provide the information referred to in paragraphs
        1 and 2: (a)  within a reasonable period after obtaining the personal
        data, but at the latest within one month, having regard to the specific
        circumstances in which the personal data are processed; (b)  if the
        personal data are to be used for communication with the data subject, at
        the latest at the time of the first communication to that data subject;
        or (c)  if a disclosure to another recipient is envisaged, at the latest
        when the personal data are first disclosed.

        4.Where the controller intends to further process the personal data for
        a purpose other than that for which the personal data were obtained, the
        controller shall provide the data subject prior to that further
        processing with information on that other purpose and with any relevant
        further information as referred to in paragraph 2

        5.Paragraphs 1 to 4 shall not apply where and insofar as: (a)  the data
        subject already has the information; (b)  the provision of such
        information proves impossible or would involve a disproportionate
        effort, in particular for processing for archiving purposes in the
        public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or
        statistical purposes, subject to the conditions and safeguards referred
        to in Article 89(1) or in so far as the obligation referred to in
        paragraph 1 of this Article is likely to render impossible or seriously
        impair the achievement of the objectives of that processing. In such
        cases the controller shall take appropriate measures to protect the data
        subject's rights and freedoms and legitimate interests, including making
        the information publicly available; (c)  obtaining or disclosure is
        expressly laid down by Union or Member State law to which the controller
        is subject and which provides appropriate measures to protect the data
        subject's legitimate interests; or (d)  where the personal data must
        remain confidential subject to an obligation of professional secrecy
        regulated by Union or Member State law, including a statutory obligation
        of secrecy. 4.5.2016 L 119/42
  - source_sentence: What type of scam is email phishing?
    sentences:
      - >-
        To further strengthen the control over his or her own data, where the
        processing of personal data is carried out by automated means, the data
        subject should also be allowed to receive personal data concerning him
        or her which he or she has provided to a controller in a structured,
        commonly used, machine-readable and interoperable format, and to
        transmit it to another controller. Data controllers should be encouraged
        to develop interoperable formats that enable data portability. That
        right should apply where the data subject provided the personal data on
        the basis of his or her consent or the processing is necessary for the
        performance of a contract. It should not apply where processing is based
        on a legal ground other than consent or contract. By its very nature,
        that right should not be exercised against controllers processing
        personal data in the exercise of their public duties. It should
        therefore not apply where the processing of the personal data is
        necessary for compliance with a legal obligation to which the controller
        is subject or for the performance of a task carried out in the public
        interest or in the exercise of an official authority vested in the
        controller. The data subject's right to transmit or receive personal
        data concerning him or her should not create an obligation for the
        controllers to adopt or maintain processing systems which are
        technically compatible. Where, in a certain set of personal data, more
        than one data subject is concerned, the right to receive the personal
        data should be without prejudice to the rights and freedoms of other
        data subjects in accordance with this Regulation. Furthermore, that
        right should not prejudice the right of the data subject to obtain the
        erasure of personal data and the limitations of that right as set out in
        this Regulation and should, in particular, not imply the erasure of
        personal data concerning the data subject which have been provided by
        him or her for the performance of a contract to the extent that and for
        as long as the personal data are necessary for the performance of that
        contract. Where technically feasible, the data subject should have the
        right to have the personal data transmitted directly from one controller
        to another.
      - >-
        In order to ensure that consent is freely given, consent should not
        provide a valid legal ground for the processing of personal data in a
        specific case where there is a clear imbalance between the data subject
        and the controller, in particular where the controller is a public
        authority and it is therefore unlikely that consent was freely given in
        all the circumstances of that specific situation. Consent is presumed
        not to be freely given if it does not allow separate consent to be given
        to different personal data processing operations despite it being
        appropriate in the individual case, or if the performance of a contract,
        including the provision of a service, is dependent on the consent
        despite such consent not being necessary for such performance.
      - >-
        Email phishing is a type of identity theft scam conducted via email or
        SMS. The attacker uses social engineering tactics such as impersonating
        trusted entities and inducing urgency. Victims are tricked into
        disclosing personal information or downloading malware.


        Scenarios:

        - Scenario 1: Emails impersonating high-ranking executives accuse
        victims of crimes to coerce them into revealing information or opening
        malware-laden attachments.

        - Scenario 2: Emails/SMS from fake banks or authorities alert victims of
        data breaches, directing them to spoofed websites to input credentials.

        - Scenario 3: SMS messages deliver disguised malware apps that harvest
        sensitive data.

        - Scenario 4: SMS links lead to pharming sites that mimic trusted brands
        and steal login data through fake pop-ups.
  - source_sentence: >-
      What can Member States provide for in respect of the processing of
      employees' personal data?
    sentences:
      - >-
        1.The lead supervisory authority shall cooperate with the other
        supervisory authorities concerned in accordance with this Article in an
        endeavour to reach consensus. The lead supervisory authority and the
        supervisory authorities concerned shall exchange all relevant
        information with each other.

        2.The lead supervisory authority may request at any time other
        supervisory authorities concerned to provide mutual assistance pursuant
        to Article 61 and may conduct joint operations pursuant to Article 62,
        in particular for carrying out investigations or for monitoring the
        implementation of a measure concerning a controller or processor
        established in another Member State.

        3.The lead supervisory authority shall, without delay, communicate the
        relevant information on the matter to the other supervisory authorities
        concerned. It shall without delay submit a draft decision to the other
        supervisory authorities concerned for their opinion and take due account
        of their views.

        4.Where any of the other supervisory authorities concerned within a
        period of four weeks after having been consulted in accordance with
        paragraph 3 of this Article, expresses a relevant and reasoned objection
        to the draft decision, the lead supervisory authority shall, if it does
        not follow the relevant and reasoned objection or is of the opinion that
        the objection is not relevant or reasoned, submit the matter to the
        consistency mechanism referred to in Article 63

        5.Where the lead supervisory authority intends to follow the relevant
        and reasoned objection made, it shall submit to the other supervisory
        authorities concerned a revised draft decision for their opinion. That
        revised draft decision shall be subject to the procedure referred to in
        paragraph 4 within a period of two weeks.

        6.Where none of the other supervisory authorities concerned has objected
        to the draft decision submitted by the lead supervisory authority within
        the period referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5, the lead supervisory
        authority and the supervisory authorities concerned shall be deemed to
        be in agreement with that draft decision and shall be bound by it.

        7.The lead supervisory authority shall adopt and notify the decision to
        the main establishment or single establishment of the controller or
        processor, as the case may be and inform the other supervisory
        authorities concerned and the Board of the decision in question,
        including a summary of the relevant facts and grounds. The supervisory
        authority with which a complaint has been lodged shall inform the
        complainant on the decision.

        8.By derogation from paragraph 7, where a complaint is dismissed or
        rejected, the supervisory authority with which the complaint was lodged
        shall adopt the decision and notify it to the complainant and shall
        inform the controller thereof.

        9.Where the lead supervisory authority and the supervisory authorities
        concerned agree to dismiss or reject parts of a complaint and to act on
        other parts of that complaint, a separate decision shall be adopted for
        each of those parts of the matter. The lead supervisory authority shall
        adopt the decision for the part concerning actions in relation to the
        controller, shall notify it to the main establishment or single
        establishment of the controller or processor on the territory of its
        Member State and shall inform the complainant thereof, while the
        supervisory authority of the complainant shall adopt the decision for
        the part concerning dismissal or rejection of that complaint, and shall
        notify it to that complainant and shall inform the controller or
        processor thereof.

        10.After being notified of the decision of the lead supervisory
        authority pursuant to paragraphs 7 and 9, the controller or processor
        shall take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with the decision
        as regards processing activities in the context of all its
        establishments in the Union. The controller or processor shall notify
        the measures taken for complying with the decision to the lead
        supervisory authority, which shall inform the other supervisory
        authorities concerned. 4.5.2016 L 119/71  

        11.Where, in exceptional circumstances, a supervisory authority
        concerned has reasons to consider that there is an urgent need to act in
        order to protect the interests of data subjects, the urgency procedure
        referred to in Article 66 shall apply.

        12.The lead supervisory authority and the other supervisory authorities
        concerned shall supply the information required under this Article to
        each other by electronic means, using a standardised format.
      - >-
        This Regulation should apply to all matters concerning the protection of
        fundamental rights and freedoms vis-à- vis the processing of personal
        data which are not subject to specific obligations with the same
        objective set out in Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and
        of the Council (2), including the obligations on the controller and the
        rights of natural persons. In order to clarify the relationship between
        this Regulation and Directive 2002/58/EC, that Directive should be
        amended accordingly. Once this Regulation is adopted, Directive
        2002/58/EC should be reviewed in particular in order to ensure
        consistency with this Regulation, 4.5.2016 L 119/31 Official Journal of
        the European Union EN
      - >-
        1.Member States may, by law or by collective agreements, provide for
        more specific rules to ensure the protection of the rights and freedoms
        in respect of the processing of employees' personal data in the
        employment context, in particular for the purposes of the recruitment,
        the performance of the contract of employment, including discharge of
        obligations laid down by law or by collective agreements, management,
        planning and organisation of work, equality and diversity in the
        workplace, health and safety at work, protection of employer's or
        customer's property and for the purposes of the exercise and enjoyment,
        on an individual or collective basis, of rights and benefits related to
        employment, and for the purpose of the termination of the employment
        relationship.

        2.Those rules shall include suitable and specific measures to safeguard
        the data subject's human dignity, legitimate interests and fundamental
        rights, with particular regard to the transparency of processing, the
        transfer of personal data within a group of undertakings, or a group of
        enterprises engaged in a joint economic activity and monitoring systems
        at the work place.

        3.Each Member State shall notify to the Commission those provisions of
        its law which it adopts pursuant to paragraph 1, by 25 May 2018 and,
        without delay, any subsequent amendment affecting them.
  - source_sentence: >-
      Who may carry out the monitoring of compliance with a code of conduct
      according to Article 40?
    sentences:
      - >-
        It should be ascertained whether all appropriate technological
        protection and organisational measures have been implemented to
        establish immediately whether a personal data breach has taken place and
        to inform promptly the supervisory authority and the data subject. The
        fact that the notification was made without undue delay should be
        established taking into account in particular the nature and gravity of
        the personal data breach and its consequences and adverse effects for
        the data subject. Such notification may result in an intervention of the
        supervisory authority in accordance with its tasks and powers laid down
        in this Regulation.
      - >-
        1.Without prejudice to the tasks and powers of the competent supervisory
        authority under Articles 57 and 58, the monitoring of compliance with a
        code of conduct pursuant to Article 40 may be carried out by a body
        which has an appropriate level of expertise in relation to the
        subject-matter of the code and is accredited for that purpose by the
        competent supervisory authority.

        2.A body as referred to in paragraph 1 may be accredited to monitor
        compliance with a code of conduct where that body has: (a)  demonstrated
        its independence and expertise in relation to the subject-matter of the
        code to the satisfaction of the competent supervisory authority; (b) 
        established procedures which allow it to assess the eligibility of
        controllers and processors concerned to apply the code, to monitor their
        compliance with its provisions and to periodically review its operation;
        (c)  established procedures and structures to handle complaints about
        infringements of the code or the manner in which the code has been, or
        is being, implemented by a controller or processor, and to make those
        procedures and structures transparent to data subjects and the public;
        and (d)  demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent supervisory
        authority that its tasks and duties do not result in a conflict of
        interests.

        3.The competent supervisory authority shall submit the draft criteria
        for accreditation of a body as referred to in paragraph 1 of this
        Article to the Board pursuant to the consistency mechanism referred to
        in Article 63

        4.Without prejudice to the tasks and powers of the competent supervisory
        authority and the provisions of Chapter VIII, a body as referred to in
        paragraph 1 of this Article shall, subject to appropriate safeguards,
        take appropriate action in cases of infringement of the code by a
        controller or processor, including suspension or exclusion of the
        controller or processor concerned from the code. It shall inform the
        competent supervisory authority of such actions and the reasons for
        taking them.

        5.The competent supervisory authority shall revoke the accreditation of
        a body as referred to in paragraph 1 if the conditions for accreditation
        are not, or are no longer, met or where actions taken by the body
        infringe this Regulation.

        6.This Article shall not apply to processing carried out by public
        authorities and bodies.
      - >-
        **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).
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: modernbert-embed-base
    results:
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 768
          type: dim_768
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.4722222222222222
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.5176767676767676
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.5606060606060606
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.6262626262626263
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.4722222222222222
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.45707070707070707
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.41919191919191917
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.3686868686868687
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.10744943033903623
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.26608727944653593
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.34406006429440505
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.4659389870881806
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.5401716046081384
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.507344276094276
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.599867635937737
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 512
          type: dim_512
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.4444444444444444
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.48484848484848486
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.5454545454545454
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.6035353535353535
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.4444444444444444
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.425084175084175
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.38939393939393935
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.34545454545454546
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.10696222604501372
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.2624743791545604
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.33619946460876615
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.4500328919932141
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.5158080665667841
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.48009359467692786
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.5849897337213674
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 256
          type: dim_256
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.4393939393939394
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.48484848484848486
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.5328282828282829
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.5959595959595959
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.4393939393939394
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.42424242424242425
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.3919191919191919
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.34242424242424246
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.10271305939213461
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.2524950261989839
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.3299273633280064
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.43817972049972254
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.5075068512202371
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.475029060445727
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.575432362881971
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 128
          type: dim_128
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.4090909090909091
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.4494949494949495
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.5025252525252525
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.5606060606060606
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.4090909090909091
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.38720538720538716
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.35909090909090907
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.31237373737373736
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.10179072090154902
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.24380388815439752
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.31848489362763427
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.42624168630280224
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.47879385940457725
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.4431096681096682
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.5380767617124423
            name: Cosine Map@100
      - task:
          type: information-retrieval
          name: Information Retrieval
        dataset:
          name: dim 64
          type: dim_64
        metrics:
          - type: cosine_accuracy@1
            value: 0.3207070707070707
            name: Cosine Accuracy@1
          - type: cosine_accuracy@3
            value: 0.36363636363636365
            name: Cosine Accuracy@3
          - type: cosine_accuracy@5
            value: 0.4090909090909091
            name: Cosine Accuracy@5
          - type: cosine_accuracy@10
            value: 0.4823232323232323
            name: Cosine Accuracy@10
          - type: cosine_precision@1
            value: 0.3207070707070707
            name: Cosine Precision@1
          - type: cosine_precision@3
            value: 0.30808080808080807
            name: Cosine Precision@3
          - type: cosine_precision@5
            value: 0.28686868686868683
            name: Cosine Precision@5
          - type: cosine_precision@10
            value: 0.2547979797979798
            name: Cosine Precision@10
          - type: cosine_recall@1
            value: 0.0790786942217193
            name: Cosine Recall@1
          - type: cosine_recall@3
            value: 0.19653931495330396
            name: Cosine Recall@3
          - type: cosine_recall@5
            value: 0.2591639375393947
            name: Cosine Recall@5
          - type: cosine_recall@10
            value: 0.3567469687806678
            name: Cosine Recall@10
          - type: cosine_ndcg@10
            value: 0.38901697446386563
            name: Cosine Ndcg@10
          - type: cosine_mrr@10
            value: 0.3549462882796216
            name: Cosine Mrr@10
          - type: cosine_map@100
            value: 0.44980389020525874
            name: Cosine Map@100

modernbert-embed-base

This is a sentence-transformers model finetuned from nomic-ai/modernbert-embed-base. It maps sentences & paragraphs to a 768-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: nomic-ai/modernbert-embed-base
  • Maximum Sequence Length: 8192 tokens
  • Output Dimensionality: 768 dimensions
  • Similarity Function: Cosine Similarity
  • Language: en
  • License: apache-2.0

Model Sources

Full Model Architecture

SentenceTransformer(
  (0): Transformer({'max_seq_length': 8192, 'do_lower_case': False, 'architecture': 'ModernBertModel'})
  (1): Pooling({'word_embedding_dimension': 768, '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 may carry out the monitoring of compliance with a code of conduct according to Article 40?',
    '1.Without prejudice to the tasks and powers of the competent supervisory authority under Articles 57 and 58, the monitoring of compliance with a code of conduct pursuant to Article 40 may be carried out by a body which has an appropriate level of expertise in relation to the subject-matter of the code and is accredited for that purpose by the competent supervisory authority.\n2.A body as referred to in paragraph 1 may be accredited to monitor compliance with a code of conduct where that body has: (a)  demonstrated its independence and expertise in relation to the subject-matter of the code to the satisfaction of the competent supervisory authority; (b)  established procedures which allow it to assess the eligibility of controllers and processors concerned to apply the code, to monitor their compliance with its provisions and to periodically review its operation; (c)  established procedures and structures to handle complaints about infringements of the code or the manner in which the code has been, or is being, implemented by a controller or processor, and to make those procedures and structures transparent to data subjects and the public; and (d)  demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent supervisory authority that its tasks and duties do not result in a conflict of interests.\n3.The competent supervisory authority shall submit the draft criteria for accreditation of a body as referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article to the Board pursuant to the consistency mechanism referred to in Article 63\n4.Without prejudice to the tasks and powers of the competent supervisory authority and the provisions of Chapter VIII, a body as referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall, subject to appropriate safeguards, take appropriate action in cases of infringement of the code by a controller or processor, including suspension or exclusion of the controller or processor concerned from the code. It shall inform the competent supervisory authority of such actions and the reasons for taking them.\n5.The competent supervisory authority shall revoke the accreditation of a body as referred to in paragraph 1 if the conditions for accreditation are not, or are no longer, met or where actions taken by the body infringe this Regulation.\n6.This Article shall not apply to processing carried out by public authorities and bodies.',
    'It should be ascertained whether all appropriate technological protection and organisational measures have been implemented to establish immediately whether a personal data breach has taken place and to inform promptly the supervisory authority and the data subject. The fact that the notification was made without undue delay should be established taking into account in particular the nature and gravity of the personal data breach and its consequences and adverse effects for the data subject. Such notification may result in an intervention of the supervisory authority in accordance with its tasks and powers laid down in this Regulation.',
]
embeddings = model.encode(sentences)
print(embeddings.shape)
# [3, 768]

# Get the similarity scores for the embeddings
similarities = model.similarity(embeddings, embeddings)
print(similarities)
# tensor([[1.0000, 0.6245, 0.2334],
#         [0.6245, 1.0000, 0.3201],
#         [0.2334, 0.3201, 1.0000]])

Evaluation

Metrics

Information Retrieval

Metric Value
cosine_accuracy@1 0.4722
cosine_accuracy@3 0.5177
cosine_accuracy@5 0.5606
cosine_accuracy@10 0.6263
cosine_precision@1 0.4722
cosine_precision@3 0.4571
cosine_precision@5 0.4192
cosine_precision@10 0.3687
cosine_recall@1 0.1074
cosine_recall@3 0.2661
cosine_recall@5 0.3441
cosine_recall@10 0.4659
cosine_ndcg@10 0.5402
cosine_mrr@10 0.5073
cosine_map@100 0.5999

Information Retrieval

Metric Value
cosine_accuracy@1 0.4444
cosine_accuracy@3 0.4848
cosine_accuracy@5 0.5455
cosine_accuracy@10 0.6035
cosine_precision@1 0.4444
cosine_precision@3 0.4251
cosine_precision@5 0.3894
cosine_precision@10 0.3455
cosine_recall@1 0.107
cosine_recall@3 0.2625
cosine_recall@5 0.3362
cosine_recall@10 0.45
cosine_ndcg@10 0.5158
cosine_mrr@10 0.4801
cosine_map@100 0.585

Information Retrieval

Metric Value
cosine_accuracy@1 0.4394
cosine_accuracy@3 0.4848
cosine_accuracy@5 0.5328
cosine_accuracy@10 0.596
cosine_precision@1 0.4394
cosine_precision@3 0.4242
cosine_precision@5 0.3919
cosine_precision@10 0.3424
cosine_recall@1 0.1027
cosine_recall@3 0.2525
cosine_recall@5 0.3299
cosine_recall@10 0.4382
cosine_ndcg@10 0.5075
cosine_mrr@10 0.475
cosine_map@100 0.5754

Information Retrieval

Metric Value
cosine_accuracy@1 0.4091
cosine_accuracy@3 0.4495
cosine_accuracy@5 0.5025
cosine_accuracy@10 0.5606
cosine_precision@1 0.4091
cosine_precision@3 0.3872
cosine_precision@5 0.3591
cosine_precision@10 0.3124
cosine_recall@1 0.1018
cosine_recall@3 0.2438
cosine_recall@5 0.3185
cosine_recall@10 0.4262
cosine_ndcg@10 0.4788
cosine_mrr@10 0.4431
cosine_map@100 0.5381

Information Retrieval

Metric Value
cosine_accuracy@1 0.3207
cosine_accuracy@3 0.3636
cosine_accuracy@5 0.4091
cosine_accuracy@10 0.4823
cosine_precision@1 0.3207
cosine_precision@3 0.3081
cosine_precision@5 0.2869
cosine_precision@10 0.2548
cosine_recall@1 0.0791
cosine_recall@3 0.1965
cosine_recall@5 0.2592
cosine_recall@10 0.3567
cosine_ndcg@10 0.389
cosine_mrr@10 0.3549
cosine_map@100 0.4498

Training Details

Training Dataset

Unnamed Dataset

  • Size: 1,580 training samples
  • Columns: anchor and positive
  • Approximate statistics based on the first 1000 samples:
    anchor positive
    type string string
    details
    • min: 7 tokens
    • mean: 15.21 tokens
    • max: 35 tokens
    • min: 25 tokens
    • mean: 648.23 tokens
    • max: 2429 tokens
  • Samples:
    anchor positive
    What bodies or sources shall the Commission take into account? 1.By 25 May 2020 and every four years thereafter, the Commission shall submit a report on the evaluation and review of this Regulation to the European Parliament and to the Council. The reports shall be made public.
    2.In the context of the evaluations and reviews referred to in paragraph 1, the Commission shall examine, in particular, the application and functioning of: (a) Chapter V on the transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations with particular regard to decisions adopted pursuant to Article 45(3) of this Regulation and decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC; (b) Chapter VII on cooperation and consistency.
    3.For the purpose of paragraph 1, the Commission may request information from Member States and supervisory authorities.
    4.In carrying out the evaluations and reviews referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Commission shall take into account the positions and findings of the European Parliament, of the Council, and ...
    What enables researchers within social science to obtain essential knowledge about the long-term correlation of social conditions? By coupling information from registries, researchers can obtain new knowledge of great value with regard to widespread medical conditions such as cardiovascular disease, cancer and depression. On the basis of registries, research results can be enhanced, as they draw on a larger population. Within social science, research on the basis of registries enables researchers to obtain essential knowledge about the long-term correlation of a number of social conditions such as unemployment and education with other life conditions. Research results obtained through registries provide solid, high-quality knowledge which can provide the basis for the formulation and implementation of knowledge-based policy, improve the quality of life for a number of people and improve the efficiency of social services. In order to facilitate scientific research, personal data can be processed for scientific research purposes, subject to appropriate conditions and safeguards set out in Union or Member State law.
    What is the article that pertains to approving binding corporate rules? 1.Each supervisory authority shall have all of the following investigative powers: (a) to order the controller and the processor, and, where applicable, the controller's or the processor's representative to provide any information it requires for the performance of its tasks; (b) to carry out investigations in the form of data protection audits; (c) to carry out a review on certifications issued pursuant to Article 42(7); (d) to notify the controller or the processor of an alleged infringement of this Regulation; (e) to obtain, from the controller and the processor, access to all personal data and to all information necessary for the performance of its tasks; (f) to obtain access to any premises of the controller and the processor, including to any data processing equipment and means, in accordance with Union or Member State procedural law.
    2.Each supervisory authority shall have all of the following corrective powers: (a) to issue warnings to a controller or processor that inte...
  • Loss: MatryoshkaLoss with these parameters:
    {
        "loss": "MultipleNegativesRankingLoss",
        "matryoshka_dims": [
            768,
            512,
            256,
            128,
            64
        ],
        "matryoshka_weights": [
            1,
            1,
            1,
            1,
            1
        ],
        "n_dims_per_step": -1
    }
    

Training Hyperparameters

Non-Default Hyperparameters

  • eval_strategy: epoch
  • gradient_accumulation_steps: 4
  • learning_rate: 3e-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: 8
  • 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: 3e-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_768_cosine_ndcg@10 dim_512_cosine_ndcg@10 dim_256_cosine_ndcg@10 dim_128_cosine_ndcg@10 dim_64_cosine_ndcg@10
-1 -1 - 0.3515 0.3509 0.3285 0.3016 0.2617
0.2020 10 20.9258 - - - - -
0.4040 20 20.6577 - - - - -
0.6061 30 20.6479 - - - - -
0.8081 40 21.0398 - - - - -
1.0 50 20.2131 0.3647 0.3809 0.3475 0.3206 0.2865
1.2020 60 19.2345 - - - - -
1.4040 70 18.6065 - - - - -
1.6061 80 16.8382 - - - - -
1.8081 90 17.4581 - - - - -
2.0 100 16.8996 0.4571 0.4535 0.4513 0.4101 0.3576
2.2020 110 17.4694 - - - - -
2.4040 120 14.7442 - - - - -
2.6061 130 12.601 - - - - -
2.8081 140 13.037 - - - - -
3.0 150 13.0811 0.4993 0.5003 0.4866 0.4555 0.3709
3.2020 160 11.8374 - - - - -
3.4040 170 12.5389 - - - - -
3.6061 180 14.3829 - - - - -
3.8081 190 13.8871 - - - - -
4.0 200 10.3684 0.5054 0.5020 0.4947 0.4597 0.3739
4.2020 210 12.6792 - - - - -
4.4040 220 10.6044 - - - - -
4.6061 230 12.015 - - - - -
4.8081 240 10.7804 - - - - -
5.0 250 9.439 0.5190 0.5098 0.5063 0.4589 0.3753
5.2020 260 10.8849 - - - - -
5.4040 270 11.2237 - - - - -
5.6061 280 9.7149 - - - - -
5.8081 290 10.5259 - - - - -
6.0 300 9.1578 0.5227 0.5169 0.5062 0.4667 0.3777
6.2020 310 10.6102 - - - - -
6.4040 320 10.1176 - - - - -
6.6061 330 8.3092 - - - - -
6.8081 340 9.5087 - - - - -
7.0 350 11.525 0.5252 0.5144 0.5092 0.4747 0.3706
7.2020 360 10.3263 - - - - -
7.4040 370 9.7615 - - - - -
7.6061 380 9.1261 - - - - -
7.8081 390 9.6996 - - - - -
8.0 400 8.4646 0.5324 0.5158 0.5082 0.4759 0.3719
8.2020 410 9.6561 - - - - -
8.4040 420 9.504 - - - - -
8.6061 430 7.4925 - - - - -
8.8081 440 8.749 - - - - -
9.0 450 9.5831 0.5282 0.5215 0.5038 0.4741 0.3721
9.2020 460 8.5261 - - - - -
9.4040 470 9.2267 - - - - -
9.6061 480 8.3529 - - - - -
9.8081 490 8.391 - - - - -
10.0 500 9.2313 0.5374 0.5219 0.5093 0.4768 0.3749
10.2020 510 10.6238 - - - - -
10.4040 520 8.9972 - - - - -
10.6061 530 8.0452 - - - - -
10.8081 540 8.2937 - - - - -
11.0 550 8.0842 0.5402 0.5158 0.5075 0.4788 0.389
11.2020 560 7.9855 - - - - -
11.4040 570 9.1783 - - - - -
11.6061 580 8.5681 - - - - -
11.8081 590 9.0004 - - - - -
12.0 600 7.8016 0.5402 0.5199 0.5078 0.4745 0.3836
12.2020 610 8.1169 - - - - -
12.4040 620 8.7016 - - - - -
12.6061 630 8.6899 - - - - -
12.8081 640 8.1782 - - - - -
13.0 650 7.8024 0.5361 0.5178 0.5065 0.4751 0.3864
-1 -1 - 0.5402 0.5158 0.5075 0.4788 0.3890
  • The bold row denotes the saved checkpoint.

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}
}