Add new SentenceTransformer model

1_Pooling/config.json

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+{
+  "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
+}

README.md

@@ -0,0 +1,535 @@
+---
+tags:
+- sentence-transformers
+- sentence-similarity
+- feature-extraction
+- generated_from_trainer
+- dataset_size:10000
+- loss:CosineSimilarityLoss
+- dataset_size:4996
+base_model: rossieRuby/nyayadrishti-bert
+widget:
+- source_sentence: Under what article of the Constitution of India was the petition
+    filed?
+  sentences:
+  - ition No. 13009 of 1983. (Under article 32 of the Constitution of India) Gopal
+    Subra aniam (A.C) for the Petitioner Dr. Y.S. Chitale, A.V. Rangam and Mrs. Sarla
+    Chandra for the Respondent.
+  - The High Court held that (1) the appellant was in possession of the lands before
+    the passing of the decree; (2) the suits had not abated and the Board of Revenue
+    had no jurisdiction to set aside the proceedings, in the suits ' and (3) the applications
+    for restitution were not maintainable. The High Court, however, held that (1)
+    appeals against the orders for restitution lay to the revenue court, (2) the civil
+    court had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeals and (3) the respondent was
+    not estopped from raising the contention. Accordingly on March 26, 1965 the High
+    Court allowed the second appeals, set aside the order of the Additional Civil
+    Judge and returned the memoranda of appeals for presentation to the proper court.
+  - The question whether respondent No. 4 Ram Nath Singh and his son Vijendra Singh
+    are guilty of contumacious and wilful disregard of this Court 's order must depend
+    on the precise meaning of the words `status quo as in the High Court '. There
+    is not much of a controversy as to the scope and effect of the status quo order
+    passed by this Court. Shri L.N. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
+    submitted that the words 'status quo as in the High Court ' mean status quo as
+    prevailing between the parties when the matter was pending in the High Court and
+    not after the High Court had passed the impugned judgment and disposed of the
+    writ petition.
+- source_sentence: Who delivered the order of the Court?
+  sentences:
+  - 'N: Review Petition (Criminal) Nos. 24 1 242 of 1989. IN Criminal Appeal Nos.
+    544 545 of 1986. Mahabir Singh for the Petitioner. A.N. Mulla, S.B. Upadhyay for
+    the Respondents. The Order of the Court was delivered by RAY, J.It is very unfortunate
+    that a controversy has arisen following the judgment sought to be reviewed in
+    Criminal Appeal Nos. 544 45 of 1986 rendered by this Bench on 31st January 1989
+    whereby this Court while confirming the conviction of both the respondents/accused
+    reduced the sentence of imprisonment in respect of each of the respond ents from
+    10 years to 5 years by invoking the proviso to Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal
+    Code observing "the peculiar facts and 498 circumstances of this case coupled
+    with the conduct of the victim girl, in our view, do not call for the minimum
+    sen tence as prescribed under Section 376(2). " The State of Haryana has filed
+    the above petitions seeking review of the judgment and to "pass such other or
+    further order(s) as may be necessary in the circumstances of the case. " At the
+    outset, we may examine the scope of review of a judgment in a criminal case already
+    pronounced by this Court. Article 137 of the Constitution of India gives the power
+    to the Supreme Court to review its judgment but such special power is exercisable
+    in accordance with, and subject to, the rules of this Court made under Article
+    145 of the Constitution of India. Order XL, Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules
+    provides: "The Court may review its judgment or order but no application for review
+    will be enter tained in a civil proceeding except on the ground mentioned in Order
+    XLVII, Rule 1 of the Code and in a criminal proceeding except on the ground of
+    an error on the face of the record." This Court in a series of decisions has examined
+    the scope of review in criminal cases after the judgment pro nounced or order
+    made. Though we are not citing all those decisions, we may refer to a In the case
+    of P.N. Eswara Iyer and Ors vs Registrar, Supreme Court of India, ; the Constitution
+    Bench of this Court while considering the rule observed thus: "The rule (Order
+    XL, Rule 1), on its face affords a wider set of grounds for review for orders
+    in civil proceedings, but limits the ground vis a vis criminal proceedings to
+    ''errors apparent on the face of the record. ''. " See also Sow Chandra Kanta
+    & Anr. vs Sheik Habib, ; and Sheonandan Paswan vs State of Bihar and Or ders,
+    In our considered view, when the present matter is examined in the light of the
+    decisions referred to above, we find no error apparent on the face of the record
+    necessitat ing review of the judgment and as such these review peti tions are
+    liable to be dismissed. 499 We have heard the arguments of the learned senior
+    coun sel, Mr. Rajinder Sachar who though initially started his arguments on behalf
+    of the People ''s Union for Civil Liber ties ultimately advanced his arguments
+    on behalf of the State in these review petitions on the representation made by
+    Mr. Mahabir Singh, the learned counsel for the State. Mr. R.K.P. Shankar Dass
+    who advanced his arguments on behalf of Mahila Sanyukt Morcha stated that his
+    arguments may also be treated as supplemental to the arguments of Mr. Rajinder
+    Sachar. Mr. Mulla, the learned senior counsel appeared on behalf of the respondents.
+    Although we have found that the Review Petitions are liable to be dismissed on
+    the ground that there is no error apparent on the face of the record, we, however,
+    in view of the elaborate submissions made by the various learned coun sel appearing
+    before us, would like to make the following observations. The facts of the case
+    are briefly stated in the Criminal Appeals and, therefore, it is not necessary
+    to restate the same. Suffice to say that during the course of the '' hearing on
+    the appeals on behalf of the respondents/accused, it has been urged by the learned
+    defence counsel that the victim Suman Rani was a woman of questionable character
+    and easy virtue with lewd and lascivious behaviour and as such her version is
+    not worthy of acceptance. After considerable debate on the merits of the case,
+    the argument was confined only with regard to the quantum of sentence. after meticu
+    lously examining the entire matter, this Court came to the conclusion that the
+    proviso to Section 376(2) I.P.C. could be invoked having regard to the peculiar
+    facts and circum stances of the case coupled with the conduct of the victim and
+    the mandatory sentence provided under the penal provi sion is not called for.
+    At this juncture, we would like to point put that the very confirmation of the
+    conviction accepting the sole testimony of the victim Suman Rani rejecting the
+    arguments of the defence counsel is itself a clear indication that this Court
+    was of the view that the character or reputation of the victim has no bearing
+    or relevance either in the matter of adjudging the guilt of the accused or imposing
+    punishment under Section 376 I.P.C. We would like to state with all emphasis that
+    such factors are wholly alien to the very scope and object of Section 376 and
+    can never serve either as mitigating or extenuating circumstances for impos ing
+    the sub minimum sentence with the aid of the proviso to Section 376(2) of the
+    I.P.C. In fact, we have expressed our 500 views in the judgment itself '' stating
+    "No doubt an offence of this nature has to be viewed very seriously and has to
+    be dealt with condign punishment. " We have neither characterised the victim,
+    Suman Rani as a woman of questionable character and easy virtue nor made any reference
+    to her character or reputation in any part of our judgment but used the expression
+    "conduct" in the lexi graphical meaning for the limited purpose of showing as
+    to how Suman Rani had behaved or conducted herself in not telling any one for
+    about 5 days about the sexual assault perpetrated on her till she was examined
+    on 28.3.1984 by the Sub Inspector of Police (PW 20) in connection with the complaint
+    given by Ram Lal (PW 14) on 22.3.1984 against Ravi Shanker. In this connection,
+    we make it further clear that we have not used the word ''conduct '' with reference
+    to the character or reputation of the victim Suman Rani. Before parting with this
+    matter, we would like to ex press that this Court is second to none in upholding
+    the decency and dignity of woman hood and we have not expressed any view in our
+    judgment that character, reputation or status of a raped victim is a relevant
+    factor for considera tion by the Court while awarding the sentence to a rapist.
+    With the above observations, we dismiss the Review Peti tions. G.N. Petitions
+    dismissed.'
+  - N.A. Palkhivala, section N. Andley, and J. B. Dadachanji, for the appellant. K.N.
+    Rajagopal Sastri and D. Gupta, for the respondent.
+  - After considering the submissions advanced by learned counsels for the parties
+    we are constrained to hold that Dewan Bishen Dass predecessor of the appellants
+    was a Wasidar and the lands in question were wasidari land leased out to him for
+    the purpose of constructing buildings. This lease is governed by Ailan No. 10
+    as well as by the Lands Grants Act 1960. We affirm the findings of the High Court
+    which held the land as Wasidari land. The land was transferred by Purnesh Chandra
+    and others, legal representatives of the original lessee Dewan Bishen Dass, in
+    favour of the appellants in contravention of the provisions of section 12(A) of
+    the Jammu and Kashmir Land Grants Act, 1960. The impugned notice under section
+    4(1) of the Jammu and Kashmir (Public Premises Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants)
+    Act is in accordance with law and as such it is valid. Under the said Act as well
+    as the rule the appellants are entitled to get compensation of the buildings and
+    structures as well as of the improvements made on the land even though they are
+    not entitled to get compensation in respect of value of the land.
+- source_sentence: What does Note (1) of the General Information Table state about
+    the cost?
+  sentences:
+  - Among the very few exceptions to this uninterrupted flow of the court process
+    is section 494, Cr. Even here, the Public Prosecutor not any executive authority
+    is entrusted by the Code with a limited power to withdraw from a prosecution,
+    with the (1) Chandler vs Judicial Council of the Tenth Circuit of the U.S. , 1970.
+    48 court 's consent whereupon the case comes to a close. What the law has ignited,
+    the law alone shall extinguish.
+  - Serial "Tamas" depicts the Hindu Muslim tension and sikhmuslim tension before
+    the partition of India. It further shows how the killings and looting took place
+    between these communities before the pre independence at Lahore. "Tamas" is based
+    on a book written by Sree Bhisham Sahni. It depicts the period prior to partition
+    and how communal violence was generated by fundamentalists and extremists in both
+    communities and how innocent persons were duped into serving the ulterior purpose
+    of fundamentalists and communities of both sides and how an innocent boy is seduced
+    to violence resulting in his harming both communities. It further shows how extremist
+    elements in both communities infused tension and hatred for their own ends. That
+    is how the two learned Judges of the High Court of Bombay mentioned hereinbefore
+    have viewed it. They have also seen that realisation ultimately dawns as to the
+    futility of it all and finally how inherent goodness in human mind triumphs and
+    both communities learn to live in amity. They saw that the people learnt this
+    lesson in a hard way. This is the opinion expressed by two experienced Judges
+    of the High Court after viewing the serial.
+  - 'General Information Table Note: (1) The cost shown in the column 4 is only estimated
+    cost. It will increase or decrease according to the rise or fall in the price
+    at the time of completion of the property. Note: (2) The data given in the above
+    mentioned table can be amended as felt neces sary. The last paragraph of the letter
+    dated 19/20.1.84 (Annexure ''D '') reads thus: "If you want to buy the house on
+    the above price/instalment then you must send by 28.1.1984 your written acceptance
+    on the annexed proforma to the Registration Section of this office."'
+- source_sentence: Were the donees of the life estate adults or minors at the time
+    of the will?
+  sentences:
+  - The donees of the life estate were minors at the date of the will and there was
+    no knowing when they would get married and how many children each would have.
+    It would therefore be reason able to expect that the testatrix would so arrange
+    her affairs that each of the foster children should get half of the income of
+    the property for life and that their children should succeed to the respective
+    interest of their parents. It is hardly likely that the testatrix would know the
+    difference between joint tenants and tenants in common and she would naturally
+    be eager to treat the foster children as her own children so that the heirs of
+    the foster children would take share and share alike the properties be in divided
+    per stirpes among them.
+  - 'The learned Solicitor General who appeared for the Commissioner of Income tax,
+    West Bengal, combated the contentions raised by ''Mr. Chatterjee on a two fold
+    ground: (1) In the first instance, without questioning the jurisdiction of this
+    Court to grant special leave against an order of an Income tax Tribunal, he argued
+    that such leave should not be granted when remedies provided by the Income tax
+    Act itself were available for correcting errors of the Tribunal, and had been
+    taken but without success. It was said that the power conferred on this Court
+    by article 136 of the Constitution being an extraordinary power, its exercise
+    should be limited to cases of patent and glaring errors of procedure, or where
+    there has been a failure of justice because of the violation of the rules of natural
+    justice or like causes but that this discretionary power should not be exercised
+    for the purpose of reviewing findings of fact when the law dealing with the subject
+    has declared those findings as final and conclusive.'
+  - According ly, the Appellate Tribunal did not specifically examine the alternative
+    position whether the process of calendering of the type and kind adopted by the
+    appellant really shared the common element or characteristic possessed by the
+    other processes specifically enumerated. Therefore, if it is to be held that the
+    expression "any other process" in Sec. 2(f)(v) must be understood and construed
+    ejus dem generis, then the question whether the "process" of calendering employed
+    in the present case belongs to the same genus as the processes envisaged in the
+    preceding expressions in the section would have to be examined afresh.
+- source_sentence: What was the basis of the loan advances to the assessee?
+  sentences:
+  - 'It was, however, stated by the Tribunal that taking into account the correspondence
+    and the documents referred to earlier it was satisfied with the assessee ''s case
+    that the transfer of shares to London at issue price or at par was throughout
+    the basis of the advances of loans to the assessee. It is necessary to reproduce
+    paragraph 31 of the order of the Tribunal : "In October 1953, there was no mention
+    of any capital gains tax being revived. At that time the asses 144 see could not
+    have had any idea of avoiding or reducing any liability to capital gains tax.
+    The learned counsel for the department laid some emphasis on the fact that there
+    was no enforceable arrangement. The question as to whether there was an enforceable
+    arrangement or not is not really material. What we have to find out is whether
+    the object in putting through these transactions of taking over the shares at
+    par or at issue price was one of avoidance or reduction of liability to capital
+    gains tax. That object does not get established by the mere absence of an enforceable
+    arrangement. Having regard to the assessee being the subsidiary of I.C.I., there
+    is nothing surprising about the arrangement not being so formal or not being put
+    through after complying with all the necessary legal formalities. The absence
+    of formal agreement is thus understandable in this context and cannot by itself
+    suggest anything in favour of the department. Businessmen are not always motivated
+    by legalistic considerations. Even taking that the arrangement was only binding
+    morally and not legally, still so long as the assessee wanted to fulfil a moral
+    obligation and had not the capital gains tax in mind, it cannot be said that the
+    transaction was entered into with the object of avoidance or reduction of liability
+    to capital gains tax".'
+  - A. V. Viswanatha Sastri, R. K. Garg, M. K. Ramamurthi, D. P. Singh and section
+    C. Agarwala, for the appellants. M. C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India. B.
+    P. Rajgarhia and K. K. Sinha, for the respondents.
+  - The requirement of obtaining opinion E; of the Advisory Board is an additional
+    safeguard over and above the safeguard afforded to the, detenu of Making a representation
+    against the order of detention. The opinion of the Advisory Board even if given
+    after consideration of the representation is no substitute for the consideration
+    of the representation by the detaining authority. This Court pointed out in Khairul
+    Haque vs The State of West Bengal(1).
+pipeline_tag: sentence-similarity
+library_name: sentence-transformers
+---
+
+# SentenceTransformer based on rossieRuby/nyayadrishti-bert
+
+This is a [sentence-transformers](https://www.SBERT.net) model finetuned from [rossieRuby/nyayadrishti-bert](https://huggingface.co/rossieRuby/nyayadrishti-bert). 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:** [rossieRuby/nyayadrishti-bert](https://huggingface.co/rossieRuby/nyayadrishti-bert) <!-- at revision 1fb57b531f242c78a01a6abd89b545f078f5dffa -->
+- **Maximum Sequence Length:** 512 tokens
+- **Output Dimensionality:** 768 dimensions
+- **Similarity Function:** Cosine Similarity
+<!-- - **Training Dataset:** Unknown -->
+<!-- - **Language:** Unknown -->
+<!-- - **License:** Unknown -->
+
+### Model Sources
+
+- **Documentation:** [Sentence Transformers Documentation](https://sbert.net)
+- **Repository:** [Sentence Transformers on GitHub](https://github.com/UKPLab/sentence-transformers)
+- **Hugging Face:** [Sentence Transformers on Hugging Face](https://huggingface.co/models?library=sentence-transformers)
+
+### Full Model Architecture
+
+```
+SentenceTransformer(
+  (0): Transformer({'max_seq_length': 512, 'do_lower_case': False}) with Transformer model: BertModel 
+  (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})
+)
+```
+
+## Usage
+
+### Direct Usage (Sentence Transformers)
+
+First install the Sentence Transformers library:
+
+```bash
+pip install -U sentence-transformers
+```
+
+Then you can load this model and run inference.
+```python
+from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer
+
+# Download from the 🤗 Hub
+model = SentenceTransformer("rossieRuby/nyayadrishti-bert-v2")
+# Run inference
+sentences = [
+    'What was the basis of the loan advances to the assessee?',
+    'It was, however, stated by the Tribunal that taking into account the correspondence and the documents referred to earlier it was satisfied with the assessee \'s case that the transfer of shares to London at issue price or at par was throughout the basis of the advances of loans to the assessee. It is necessary to reproduce paragraph 31 of the order of the Tribunal : "In October 1953, there was no mention of any capital gains tax being revived. At that time the asses 144 see could not have had any idea of avoiding or reducing any liability to capital gains tax. The learned counsel for the department laid some emphasis on the fact that there was no enforceable arrangement. The question as to whether there was an enforceable arrangement or not is not really material. What we have to find out is whether the object in putting through these transactions of taking over the shares at par or at issue price was one of avoidance or reduction of liability to capital gains tax. That object does not get established by the mere absence of an enforceable arrangement. Having regard to the assessee being the subsidiary of I.C.I., there is nothing surprising about the arrangement not being so formal or not being put through after complying with all the necessary legal formalities. The absence of formal agreement is thus understandable in this context and cannot by itself suggest anything in favour of the department. Businessmen are not always motivated by legalistic considerations. Even taking that the arrangement was only binding morally and not legally, still so long as the assessee wanted to fulfil a moral obligation and had not the capital gains tax in mind, it cannot be said that the transaction was entered into with the object of avoidance or reduction of liability to capital gains tax".',
+    'The requirement of obtaining opinion E; of the Advisory Board is an additional safeguard over and above the safeguard afforded to the, detenu of Making a representation against the order of detention. The opinion of the Advisory Board even if given after consideration of the representation is no substitute for the consideration of the representation by the detaining authority. This Court pointed out in Khairul Haque vs The State of West Bengal(1).',
+]
+embeddings = model.encode(sentences)
+print(embeddings.shape)
+# [3, 768]
+
+# Get the similarity scores for the embeddings
+similarities = model.similarity(embeddings, embeddings)
+print(similarities.shape)
+# [3, 3]
+```
+
+<!--
+### Direct Usage (Transformers)
+
+<details><summary>Click to see the direct usage in Transformers</summary>
+
+</details>
+-->
+
+<!--
+### Downstream Usage (Sentence Transformers)
+
+You can finetune this model on your own dataset.
+
+<details><summary>Click to expand</summary>
+
+</details>
+-->
+
+<!--
+### Out-of-Scope Use
+
+*List how the model may foreseeably be misused and address what users ought not to do with the model.*
+-->
+
+<!--
+## Bias, Risks and Limitations
+
+*What are the known or foreseeable issues stemming from this model? You could also flag here known failure cases or weaknesses of the model.*
+-->
+
+<!--
+### Recommendations
+
+*What are recommendations with respect to the foreseeable issues? For example, filtering explicit content.*
+-->
+
+## Training Details
+
+### Training Dataset
+
+#### Unnamed Dataset
+
+* Size: 4,996 training samples
+* Columns: <code>sentence_0</code>, <code>sentence_1</code>, and <code>label</code>
+* Approximate statistics based on the first 1000 samples:
+  |         | sentence_0                                                                        | sentence_1                                                                           | label                                                         |
+  |:--------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|:--------------------------------------------------------------|
+  | type    | string                                                                            | string                                                                               | float                                                         |
+  | details | <ul><li>min: 6 tokens</li><li>mean: 15.18 tokens</li><li>max: 38 tokens</li></ul> | <ul><li>min: 10 tokens</li><li>mean: 149.23 tokens</li><li>max: 512 tokens</li></ul> | <ul><li>min: 1.0</li><li>mean: 1.0</li><li>max: 1.0</li></ul> |
+* Samples:
+  | sentence_0                                                                                              | sentence_1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   | label            |
+  |:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|:-----------------|
+  | <code>Who died first among the testators?</code>                                                        | <code>of the three testators, Theyi Amma died first the exact date of her death does not appear and is not very material and Kunhan Kaimal died thereafter sometime in 1930. It is the case of Kesavan Kaimal that in the events which had happened, he had become entitled by survivorship to all the properties disposed of by the will, including those of Kunhan Kaimal, and on this footing he conveyed on October 14,1938, seven items of properties, of which three belonged to Kunhan Kaimal, to one Sankarankutti Kaimal and on October 16, 1944, another three items of properties which belonged to Kunhan Kaimal, to Kalyani and Vijayan.</code> | <code>1.0</code> |
+  | <code>Why was the annual rental value of Rs. 7200 not considered a proper method of computation?</code> | <code>213 the claimants ' The annual rental value of the land acquired, namely, Rs. 7 200/ will also not furnish a proper method of computation because that was a rent fixed in 1944 when that land was not of such great value as it had acquired at the time when sec. 4 notification was issued. A perusal of the correspondence between the owners of the land and the Deputy Commissioner of Ranchi would show that the land owners had given it at consessional rate to ' the Military authorities having regard to the purpose for which it was being put to use.</code>                                                                             | <code>1.0</code> |
+  | <code>What is the date of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal's judgment and order?</code>                | <code>Appeals Nos. 776 and 777 of 1957. Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated September 25, 1956, of the Bombay High Court in Income tax Application No. 48 of 1956; and from the judgment and order dated March 17,1954, of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, in E.P.T.A. Nos. 757, 903 and 944 of 1948 49, respectively.</code>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              | <code>1.0</code> |
+* Loss: [<code>CosineSimilarityLoss</code>](https://sbert.net/docs/package_reference/sentence_transformer/losses.html#cosinesimilarityloss) with these parameters:
+  ```json
+  {
+      "loss_fct": "torch.nn.modules.loss.MSELoss"
+  }
+  ```
+
+### Training Hyperparameters
+#### Non-Default Hyperparameters
+
+- `per_device_train_batch_size`: 32
+- `per_device_eval_batch_size`: 32
+- `num_train_epochs`: 1
+- `multi_dataset_batch_sampler`: round_robin
+
+#### All Hyperparameters
+<details><summary>Click to expand</summary>
+
+- `overwrite_output_dir`: False
+- `do_predict`: False
+- `eval_strategy`: no
+- `prediction_loss_only`: True
+- `per_device_train_batch_size`: 32
+- `per_device_eval_batch_size`: 32
+- `per_gpu_train_batch_size`: None
+- `per_gpu_eval_batch_size`: None
+- `gradient_accumulation_steps`: 1
+- `eval_accumulation_steps`: None
+- `torch_empty_cache_steps`: None
+- `learning_rate`: 5e-05
+- `weight_decay`: 0.0
+- `adam_beta1`: 0.9
+- `adam_beta2`: 0.999
+- `adam_epsilon`: 1e-08
+- `max_grad_norm`: 1
+- `num_train_epochs`: 1
+- `max_steps`: -1
+- `lr_scheduler_type`: linear
+- `lr_scheduler_kwargs`: {}
+- `warmup_ratio`: 0.0
+- `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`: False
+- `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`: False
+- `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
+- `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`: batch_sampler
+- `multi_dataset_batch_sampler`: round_robin
+
+</details>
+
+### Framework Versions
+- Python: 3.11.12
+- Sentence Transformers: 4.1.0
+- Transformers: 4.51.3
+- PyTorch: 2.6.0+cu124
+- Accelerate: 1.6.0
+- Datasets: 2.14.4
+- Tokenizers: 0.21.1
+
+## Citation
+
+### BibTeX
+
+#### Sentence Transformers
+```bibtex
+@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",
+}
+```
+
+<!--
+## Glossary
+
+*Clearly define terms in order to be accessible across audiences.*
+-->
+
+<!--
+## Model Card Authors
+
+*Lists the people who create the model card, providing recognition and accountability for the detailed work that goes into its construction.*
+-->
+
+<!--
+## Model Card Contact
+
+*Provides a way for people who have updates to the Model Card, suggestions, or questions, to contact the Model Card authors.*
+-->

config.json

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+{
+  "architectures": [
+    "BertModel"
+  ],
+  "attention_probs_dropout_prob": 0.1,
+  "bos_token_id": 0,
+  "classifier_dropout": null,
+  "eos_token_ids": 0,
+  "hidden_act": "gelu",
+  "hidden_dropout_prob": 0.1,
+  "hidden_size": 768,
+  "initializer_range": 0.02,
+  "intermediate_size": 3072,
+  "layer_norm_eps": 1e-12,
+  "max_position_embeddings": 512,
+  "model_type": "bert",
+  "num_attention_heads": 12,
+  "num_hidden_layers": 12,
+  "output_past": true,
+  "pad_token_id": 0,
+  "position_embedding_type": "absolute",
+  "torch_dtype": "float32",
+  "transformers_version": "4.51.3",
+  "type_vocab_size": 2,
+  "use_cache": true,
+  "vocab_size": 30522
+}

config_sentence_transformers.json

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+{
+  "__version__": {
+    "sentence_transformers": "4.1.0",
+    "transformers": "4.51.3",
+    "pytorch": "2.6.0+cu124"
+  },
+  "prompts": {},
+  "default_prompt_name": null,
+  "similarity_fn_name": "cosine"
+}

model.safetensors

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
+oid sha256:e83ad1f112c1357aade400596f2a8f86a7d5ddc6078e33d03d93c96838313242
+size 437951328

modules.json

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+[
+  {
+    "idx": 0,
+    "name": "0",
+    "path": "",
+    "type": "sentence_transformers.models.Transformer"
+  },
+  {
+    "idx": 1,
+    "name": "1",
+    "path": "1_Pooling",
+    "type": "sentence_transformers.models.Pooling"
+  }
+]

sentence_bert_config.json

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+{
+  "max_seq_length": 512,
+  "do_lower_case": false
+}

special_tokens_map.json

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+{
+  "cls_token": {
+    "content": "[CLS]",
+    "lstrip": false,
+    "normalized": false,
+    "rstrip": false,
+    "single_word": false
+  },
+  "mask_token": {
+    "content": "[MASK]",
+    "lstrip": false,
+    "normalized": false,
+    "rstrip": false,
+    "single_word": false
+  },
+  "pad_token": {
+    "content": "[PAD]",
+    "lstrip": false,
+    "normalized": false,
+    "rstrip": false,
+    "single_word": false
+  },
+  "sep_token": {
+    "content": "[SEP]",
+    "lstrip": false,
+    "normalized": false,
+    "rstrip": false,
+    "single_word": false
+  },
+  "unk_token": {
+    "content": "[UNK]",
+    "lstrip": false,
+    "normalized": false,
+    "rstrip": false,
+    "single_word": false
+  }
+}

tokenizer_config.json

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+{
+  "added_tokens_decoder": {
+    "0": {
+      "content": "[PAD]",
+      "lstrip": false,
+      "normalized": false,
+      "rstrip": false,
+      "single_word": false,
+      "special": true
+    },
+    "100": {
+      "content": "[UNK]",
+      "lstrip": false,
+      "normalized": false,
+      "rstrip": false,
+      "single_word": false,
+      "special": true
+    },
+    "101": {
+      "content": "[CLS]",
+      "lstrip": false,
+      "normalized": false,
+      "rstrip": false,
+      "single_word": false,
+      "special": true
+    },
+    "102": {
+      "content": "[SEP]",
+      "lstrip": false,
+      "normalized": false,
+      "rstrip": false,
+      "single_word": false,
+      "special": true
+    },
+    "103": {
+      "content": "[MASK]",
+      "lstrip": false,
+      "normalized": false,
+      "rstrip": false,
+      "single_word": false,
+      "special": true
+    }
+  },
+  "clean_up_tokenization_spaces": true,
+  "cls_token": "[CLS]",
+  "do_basic_tokenize": true,
+  "do_lower_case": true,
+  "extra_special_tokens": {},
+  "mask_token": "[MASK]",
+  "max_length": 512,
+  "model_max_length": 512,
+  "never_split": null,
+  "pad_to_multiple_of": null,
+  "pad_token": "[PAD]",
+  "pad_token_type_id": 0,
+  "padding_side": "right",
+  "sep_token": "[SEP]",
+  "stride": 0,
+  "strip_accents": null,
+  "tokenize_chinese_chars": true,
+  "tokenizer_class": "BertTokenizer",
+  "truncation_side": "right",
+  "truncation_strategy": "longest_first",
+  "unk_token": "[UNK]"
+}