Researcher profile

David Recio-Mitter

David Recio-Mitter contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
7topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Maximizing Use-Case Specificity through Precision Model Tuning

Language models have become increasingly popular in recent years for tasks like information retrieval. As use-cases become oriented toward specific domains, fine-tuning becomes default for standard performance. To fine-tune these models for specific tasks and datasets, it is necessary to carefully tune the model&#39;s hyperparameters and training techniques. In this paper, we present an in-depth analysis of the performance of four transformer-based language models on the task of biomedical information retrieval. The models we consider are DeepMind&#39;s RETRO (7B parameters), GPT-J (6B parameters), GPT-3 (175B parameters), and BLOOM (176B parameters). We compare their performance on the basis of relevance, accuracy, and interpretability, using a large corpus of 480000 research papers on protein structure/function prediction as our dataset. Our findings suggest that smaller models, with <10B parameters and fine-tuned on domain-specific datasets, tend to outperform larger language models on highly specific questions in terms of accuracy, relevancy, and interpretability by a significant margin (+50% on average). However, larger models do provide generally better results on broader prompts.

preprint2021arXiv

Geodesic complexity of motion planning

We introduce the geodesic complexity of a metric space, inspired by the topological complexity of a topological space. Both of them are numerical invariants, but, while the TC only depends on the homotopy type, the GC is an invariant under isometries. We show that in many cases they coincide but we also develop tools to distinguish the two in a range of examples. To this end, we study what we denote the total cut locus, which does not appear to have been explicitly considered in the literature. To the knowledge of the author, the GC is a new invariant of a metric space. Furthermore, just like the TC, the GC has potential applications to the field of robotics.

preprint2020arXiv

Two robots moving geodesically on a tree

We study the geodesic complexity of the ordered and unordered configuration spaces of graphs in both the $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$ metrics. We determine the geodesic complexity of the ordered two-point $\varepsilon$-configuration space of any star graph in both the $\ell_1$ and $\ell_2$ metrics and of the unordered two-point configuration space of any tree in the $\ell_1$ metric, by finding explicit geodesics from any pair to any other pair, and arranging them into a minimal number of continuously-varying families. In each case the geodesic complexity matches the known value of the topological complexity.