Jingzhou Jiang

Jingzhou Jiang, Yixuan Tang, Yi Yang et al.

When task-specific labels are not available, it becomes difficult to select an embedding model for a specific target corpus. Existing labelless measures based on kernel estimators or Gaussian mixes fail in high-dimensional space, resulting in unstable rankings. We propose a flow-based labelless representation embedding evaluation (FLARE), which utilizes normalized streams to estimate information sufficiency directly from log-likelihood and avoid distance-based density estimation. We give a finite sample boundary, indicating that the estimation error depends on the intrinsic dimension of the data manifold rather than the original embedding dimension. On 11 datasets and 8 embedders, FLARE reached Spearman's $ρ$ of 0.90 under the supervised benchmark and remained stable in high-dimensional embeddings ($d \geq 3{,}584$) as the existing labelless baseline collapsed.

Jingzhou Jiang, Yi Yang, Kar Yan Tam

Hidden states change substantially across the layers of modern language models, but most layer-wise analyses focus on one aspect of that change. We propose Layer-wise Representation Dynamics (LRD), a framework with three layer-wise measurement families: Frenet (Grassmann speed and curvature) for global subspace motion, Neighborhood Retention Score (NRS) for local nearest-neighbor retention, and Graph Filtration Mutual Information (GFMI) for alignment with the final layer. Applying LRD to 31 models (encoder-based and decoder-based embedders, plus base LLMs) on 30 MTEB tasks reveals architectural and task-level differences that are not apparent from final-layer representations alone. We then use LRD for two applications: label-free model selection and inference-time layer pruning. For selection, all three model-level scores correlate positively with downstream MTEB performance, with end-to-end subspace displacement (d_{0,L}) the strongest, and the same direction holds on a smaller base-LLM MMLU panel. For pruning, GFMI is the only measurement-guided rule that beats Random at the 15% and 20% budgets and has the best median change at every budget. Frenet is effective only at the lightest budget, while NRS does not transfer from model selection to pruning. These results show that layer-wise structure provides signal for both interpretation and deployment decisions.