Model: IoannisKat1/bert-base-uncased-legal-matryoshka
Author: IoannisKat1
Pipeline: sentence-similarity
Library: sentence-transformers
Tags: sentence-transformers, safetensors, bert, sentence-similarity, feature-extraction, generated_from_trainer, dataset_size:1580, loss:MatryoshkaLoss, loss:MultipleNegativesRankingLoss, en, arxiv:1908.10084, arxiv:2205.13147, arxiv:1705.00652, base_model:google-bert/bert-base-uncased, base_model:finetune:google-bert/bert-base-uncased, license:apache-2.0, model-index, text-embeddings-inference, endpoints_compatible, region:us
Base models (finetune): id: google-bert/bert-base-uncased
Card metadata: language: en
license: apache-2.0
tags: sentence-transformers, sentence-similarity, feature-extraction, generated_from_trainer, dataset_size:1580, loss:MatryoshkaLoss, loss:MultipleNegativesRankingLoss
base_model: google-bert/bert-base-uncased
widget: source_sentence: What is the responsibility of each supervisory authority according to the Regulation?
sentences: A data subject should have the right of access to personal data which have been collected concerning him or her, and to exercise that right easily and at reasonable intervals, in order to be aware of, and verify, the lawfulness of the processing. This includes the right for data subjects to have access to data concerning their health, for example the data in their medical records containing information such as diagnoses, examination results, assessments by treating physicians and any treatment or interventions provided. Every data subject should therefore have the right to know and obtain communication in particular with regard to the purposes for which the personal data are processed, where possible the period for which the personal data are processed, the recipients of the personal data, the logic involved in any automatic personal data processing and, at least when based on profiling, the consequences of such processing. Where possible, the controller should be able to provide remote access to a secure system which would provide the data subject with direct access to his or her personal data. That right should not adversely affect the rights or freedoms of others, including trade secrets or intellectual property and in particular the copyright protecting the software. However, the result of those considerations should not be a refusal to provide all information to the data subject. Where the controller processes a large quantity of information concerning the data subject, the controller should be able to request that, before the information is delivered, the data subject specify the information or processing activities to which the request relates., Effective protection of personal data throughout the Union requires the strengthening and setting out in detail of the rights of data subjects and the obligations of those who process and determine the processing of personal data, as well as equivalent powers for monitoring and ensuring compliance with the rules for the protection of personal data and equivalent sanctions for infringements in the Member States., 1.Each Member State shall provide for one or more independent public authorities to be responsible for monitoring the application of this Regulation, in order to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons in relation to processing and to facilitate the free flow of personal data within the Union (‘supervisory authority’).
2.Each supervisory authority shall contribute to the consistent application of this Regulation throughout the Union. For that purpose, the supervisory authorities shall cooperate with each other and the Commission in accordance with Chapter VII.
3.Where more than one supervisory authority is established in a Member State, that Member State shall designate the supervisory authority which is to represent those authorities in the Board and shall set out the mechanism to ensure compliance by the other authorities with the rules relating to the consistency mechanism referred to in Article 63
4.Each Member State shall notify to the Commission the provisions of its law which it adopts pursuant to this Chapter, by 25 May 2018 and, without delay, any subsequent amendment affecting them. 4.5.2016 L 119/65, source_sentence: What amount is the total monetary compensation?
sentences: **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., 1.A transfer of personal data to a third country or an international organisation may take place where the Commission has decided that the third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within that third country, or the international organisation in question ensures an adequate level of protection. Such a transfer shall not require any specific authorisation.
2.When assessing the adequacy of the level of protection, the Commission shall, in particular, take account of the following elements: (a)  the rule of law, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, relevant legislation, both general and sectoral, including concerning public security, defence, national security and criminal law and the access of public authorities to personal data, as well as the implementation of such legislation, data protection rules, professional rules and security measures, including rules for the onward transfer of personal data to another third country or international organisation which are complied with in that country or international organisation, case-law, as well as effective and enforceable data subject rights and effective administrative and judicial redress for the data subjects whose personal data are being transferred; (b)  the existence and effective functioning of one or more independent supervisory authorities in the third country or to which an international organisation is subject, with responsibility for ensuring and enforcing compliance with the data protection rules, including adequate enforcement powers, for assisting and advising the data subjects in exercising their rights and for cooperation with the supervisory authorities of the Member States; and (c)  the international commitments the third country or international organisation concerned has entered into, or other obligations arising from legally binding conventions or instruments as well as from its participation in multilateral or regional systems, in particular in relation to the protection of personal data.
3.The Commission, after assessing the adequacy of the level of protection, may decide, by means of implementing act, that a third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within a third country, or an international organisation ensures an adequate level of protection within the meaning of paragraph 2 of this Article. The implementing act shall provide for a mechanism for a periodic review, at least every four years, which shall take into account all relevant developments in the third country or international organisation. The implementing act shall specify its territorial and sectoral application and, where applicable, identify the supervisory authority or authorities referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2 of this Article. The implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2).
4.The Commission shall, on an ongoing basis, monitor developments in third countries and international organisations that could affect the functioning of decisions adopted pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article and decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC.
5.The Commission shall, where available information reveals, in particular following the review referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article, that a third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within a third country, or an international organisation no longer ensures an adequate level of protection within the meaning of paragraph 2 of this Article, to the extent necessary, repeal, amend or suspend the decision referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article by means of implementing acts without retro-active effect. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2). On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 93(3).
6.The Commission shall enter into consultations with the third country or international organisation with a view to remedying the situation giving rise to the decision made pursuant to paragraph 5
7.A decision pursuant to paragraph 5 of this Article is without prejudice to transfers of personal data to the third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within that third country, or the international organisation in question pursuant to Articles 46 to 49
8.The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union and on its website a list of the third countries, territories and specified sectors within a third country and international organisations for which it has decided that an adequate level of protection is or is no longer ensured.
9.Decisions adopted by the Commission on the basis of Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC shall remain in force until amended, replaced or repealed by a Commission Decision adopted in accordance with paragraph 3 or 5 of this Article., **Court (Civil/Criminal): Civil**  
**Provisions:**  
**Time of commission of the act:**  
**Outcome (not guilty, guilty):**  
**Reasoning:** Claim for compensation and monetary satisfaction due to moral damage against a mobile phone company and a credit institution within the framework of inadequate fulfillment of a payment services contract for "web banking." Appropriate actions for mobile phone companies in case of a request for a "sim" card replacement due to wear or loss. They must verify the customer's identity based on the personal details and identification information registered in their system but are not liable for any changes in the latter that were not timely communicated to them. Further security measures such as phone communication or sending an SMS to the mobile number holder are not required. Payment services under Law 4357/2018. Obligation of the payment service provider, such as banks, to inform the payer after receiving a relevant order for making a payment. The content of this varies per case, such as sending a personalized code to the user's mobile phone for transaction approval, as well as sending an email immediately after its completion. However, the bank is not liable for customer damage resulting from illicit electronic transactions due to third-party interception of either the access codes for electronic banking transactions or the sim card and the phone number to which the personalized codes for approving the aforementioned transactions are sent, within the framework of increased security protocols. Appropriate actions by banks upon diagnosing illicit banking transactions that may be fraudulent. Relevant criteria for consideration. The evidence did not indicate negligent and thus tortious behavior from all defendants. The claim is dismissed.  

**Facts:** In the present claim, upon due assessment of its content, the plaintiff states that he has a mobile phone subscription with the first defendant, a mobile phone company. On October 26, 2020, in the morning, he realized that his mobile phone was offline, and by noon, he received email notifications from Bank .......... and ............ (whose third and fourth defendants are de facto universal successors, respectively), with which he holds an account, regarding transactions he had made. From phone calls from his home phone to Bank .............. and ............ Bank, he was informed that on the same day, in a very short period, four money transfers had been made from the account he maintains at Bank .............., specifically, an amount of €15,000 was transferred to the account mentioned in the claim document under the name ..........., at ........ an amount of €15,000 was transferred to the account mentioned in the claim document under the name ......... at ........... Bank, an amount of €15,000 was transferred to the plaintiff's account with his daughter as a co-holder at ......... Bank, and an amount of €6,700 was transferred from another of his accounts to the account from which the transfer to the aforementioned accounts of €45,000 was made. Additionally, from the plaintiff's account with his daughter as a co-holder at .......... Bank, an amount of €9,999 was transferred to an account under the name of .... . He attempted to log into the online banking service of Bank ......... from his home computer, but found that the service was locked, while regarding the corresponding service of ........... Bank, he requested alongside his daughter to 'lock' it. In a phone call with the call center of Bank ............, he was informed about the locking of his electronic account in the online banking service and was told to dispute the transactions, which he did immediately through ... banking, while his daughter communicated about this with ....... Bank. The transfer to the account with the beneficiary was canceled, and the amount of €15,000 was returned to the plaintiff. After his investigation, he discovered that an unknown individual appeared at the branch of the first defendant, served by the second defendant, who posed as the plaintiff and presented a forged military ID card of the plaintiff, requesting and receiving a new sim card, resulting in the deactivation of the plaintiff's sim card and gaining access to the codes sent to him by the banks for completing the transfers. Due to the negligence of the second defendant, he did not realize that the identity used was forged, as since 2010, when the plaintiff retired, he has had a police identification card. The first defendant does not have security protocols to prevent such incidents, which constitute the sim .... method, despite the issuance of a press release from the Attica Security and numerous publications regarding the aforementioned method, unlike other mobile phone companies, which implement a specific procedure for changing sim cards. The second defendant did not take the obvious step to check the functioning of the sim card before replacing it, where he would have realized that the plaintiff's mobile phone was functioning normally. Bank .......... and ........... Bank: a) accepted requests for transferring large amounts of money from accounts that had no similar activity in the past, while the plaintiff's online banking account with the above banks was locked quite some time later, b) sent email notifications regarding successful transactions in succession, under a single email, c) did not check the address ... of the perpetrators, which was different from that used by the plaintiff, and d) did not take necessary security measures to prevent fraud via sim ... against the plaintiff, as the security code (pin) sent by the banks via message to the mobile phone proved to be compromised. As a result of the above illegal and culpable behavior of the defendants, the plaintiff suffered property damage amounting to a total of €24,999, which constitutes the total amount of the transfers made by third unknown persons to accounts of unknown individuals, as stated above, and has not been refunded despite his repeated inquiries, while he also suffered distress and mental anguish, and his trust in the banks was shaken, thus entitling him to monetary compensation for his moral damage, amounting to €5,000., source_sentence: What decisions by the Commission shall remain in force until amended, replaced, or repealed?
sentences: In order to enhance compliance with this Regulation where processing operations are likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons, the controller should be responsible for the carrying-out of a data protection impact assessment to evaluate, in particular, the origin, nature, particularity and severity of that risk. The outcome of the assessment should be taken into account when determining the appropriate measures to be taken in order to demonstrate that the processing of personal data complies with this Regulation. Where a data-protection impact assessment indicates that processing operations involve a high risk which the controller cannot mitigate by appropriate measures in terms of available technology and costs of implementation, a consultation of the supervisory authority should take place prior to the processing., 1.The Member States, the supervisory authorities, the Board and the Commission shall encourage the drawing up of codes of conduct intended to contribute to the proper application of this Regulation, taking account of the specific features of the various processing sectors and the specific needs of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
2.Associations and other bodies representing categories of controllers or processors may prepare codes of conduct, or amend or extend such codes, for the purpose of specifying the application of this Regulation, such as with regard to: (a)  fair and transparent processing; 4.5.2016 L 119/56   (b)  the legitimate interests pursued by controllers in specific contexts; (c)  the collection of personal data; (d)  the pseudonymisation of personal data; (e)  the information provided to the public and to data subjects; (f)  the exercise of the rights of data subjects; (g)  the information provided to, and the protection of, children, and the manner in which the consent of the holders of parental responsibility over children is to be obtained; (h)  the measures and procedures referred to in Articles 24 and 25 and the measures to ensure security of processing referred to in Article 32; (i)  the notification of personal data breaches to supervisory authorities and the communication of such personal data breaches to data subjects; (j)  the transfer of personal data to third countries or international organisations; or (k)  out-of-court proceedings and other dispute resolution procedures for resolving disputes between controllers and data subjects with regard to processing, without prejudice to the rights of data subjects pursuant to Articles 77 and 79
3.In addition to adherence by controllers or processors subject to this Regulation, codes of conduct approved pursuant to paragraph 5 of this Article and having general validity pursuant to paragraph 9 of this Article may also be adhered to by controllers or processors that are not subject to this Regulation pursuant to Article 3 in order to provide appropriate safeguards within the framework of personal data transfers to third countries or international organisations under the terms referred to in point (e) of Article 46(2). Such controllers or processors shall make binding and enforceable commitments, via contractual or other legally binding instruments, to apply those appropriate safeguards including with regard to the rights of data subjects.
4.A code of conduct referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article shall contain mechanisms which enable the body referred to in Article 41(1) to carry out the mandatory monitoring of compliance with its provisions by the controllers or processors which undertake to apply it, without prejudice to the tasks and powers of supervisory authorities competent pursuant to Article 55 or 56
5.Associations and other bodies referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article which intend to prepare a code of conduct or to amend or extend an existing code shall submit the draft code, amendment or extension to the supervisory authority which is competent pursuant to Article 55. The supervisory authority shall provide an opinion on whether the draft code, amendment or extension complies with this Regulation and shall approve that draft code, amendment or extension if it finds that it provides sufficient appropriate safeguards.
6.Where the draft code, or amendment or extension is approved in accordance with paragraph 5, and where the code of conduct concerned does not relate to processing activities in several Member States, the supervisory authority shall register and publish the code.
7.Where a draft code of conduct relates to processing activities in several Member States, the supervisory authority which is competent pursuant to Article 55 shall, before approving the draft code, amendment or extension, submit it in the procedure referred to in Article 63 to the Board which shall provide an opinion on whether the draft code, amendment or extension complies with this Regulation or, in the situation referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article, provides appropriate safeguards.
8.Where the opinion referred to in paragraph 7 confirms that the draft code, amendment or extension complies with this Regulation, or, in the situation referred to in paragraph 3, provides appropriate safeguards, the Board shall submit its opinion to the Commission.
9.The Commission may, by way of implementing acts, decide that the approved code of conduct, amendment or extension submitted to it pursuant to paragraph 8 of this Article have general validity within the Union. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure set out in Article 93(2)
10.The Commission shall ensure appropriate publicity for the approved codes which have been decided as having general validity in accordance with paragraph
11.The Board shall collate all approved codes of conduct, amendments and extensions in a register and shall make them publicly available by way of appropriate means., 1.In the absence of a decision pursuant to Article 45(3), a controller or processor may transfer personal data to a third country or an international organisation only if the controller or processor has provided appropriate safeguards, and on condition that enforceable data subject rights and effective legal remedies for data subjects are available.
2.The appropriate safeguards referred to in paragraph 1 may be provided for, without requiring any specific authorisation from a supervisory authority, by: (a)  a legally binding and enforceable instrument between public authorities or bodies; (b)  binding corporate rules in accordance with Article 47; (c)  standard data protection clauses adopted by the Commission in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2); (d)  standard data protection clauses adopted by a supervisory authority and approved by the Commission pursuant to the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2); (e)  an approved code of conduct pursuant to Article 40 together with binding and enforceable commitments of the controller or processor in the third country to apply the appropriate safeguards, including as regards data subjects' rights; or (f)  an approved certification mechanism pursuant to Article 42 together with binding and enforceable commitments of the controller or processor in the third country to apply the appropriate safeguards, including as regards data subjects' rights.
3.Subject to the authorisation from the competent supervisory authority, the appropriate safeguards referred to in paragraph 1 may also be provided for, in particular, by: (a)  contractual clauses between the controller or processor and the controller, processor or the recipient of the personal data in the third country or international organisation; or (b)  provisions to be inserted into administrative arrangements between public authorities or bodies which include enforceable and effective data subject rights.
4.The supervisory authority shall apply the consistency mechanism referred to in Article 63 in the cases referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article.
5.Authorisations by a Member State or supervisory authority on the basis of Article 26(2) of Directive 95/46/EC shall remain valid until amended, replaced or repealed, if necessary, by that supervisory authority. Decisions adopted by the Commission on the basis of Article 26(4) of Directive 95/46/EC shall remain in force until amended, replaced or repealed, if necessary, by a Commission Decision adopted in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article., source_sentence: Who is responsible for ensuring and enforcing compliance with the data protection rules?
sentences: Any person who, in contravention of the provisions of this law or of the provisions of lawfully ratified multilateral international conventions on the protection of copyright, unlawfully makes a fixation of a work or of copies, reproduces them directly or indirectly, temporarily or permanently in any form, in whole or in part, translates, adapts, alters or transforms them, or distributes them to the public by sale or other means, or possesses with the intent of distributing them, rents, performs in public, broadcasts by radio or television or any other means, communicates to the public works or copies by any means, imports copies of a work illegally produced abroad without the consent of the author and, in general, exploits works, reproductions or copies being the object of copyright or acts against the moral right of the author to decide freely on the publication and the presentation of his work to the public without additions or deletions, shall be liable to imprisonment of no less than a year and to a fine from 2.900-15.000 Euro.
Without the permission of the performers: fixes their performance; directly or indirectly, temporarily or permanently reproduces by any means and form, in whole or in part, the fixation of their performance; distributes to the public the fixation of their performance or possesses them with the purpose of distribution; rents the fixation of their performance; broadcasts by radio and television by any means, the live performance, unless such broadcasting is rebroadcasting of a legitimate broadcasting; communicates to the public the live performance made by any means, except radio and television broadcasting; makes available to the public, by wire or wireless means, in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, the fixation of their performance.
Without the permission of phonogram producers (producers of sound recordings): directly or indirectly, temporarily or permanently reproduces by any means and form, in whole or in part, their phonograms; distributes to the public the above recordings, or possesses them with the purpose of distribution; rents the said recordings; makes available to the public, by wire or wireless means, in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, their phonograms; imports the said recordings produced abroad without their consent.
Without the permission of producers of audiovisual works (producers of visual or sound and visual recordings): directly or indirectly, temporarily or permanently reproduces by any means and form, in whole or in part, the original and the copies of their films; distributes to the public the above recordings, including the copies thereof, or possesses them with the purpose of distribution; rents the said recordings; makes available to the public, by wire or wireless means, in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, the original and the copies of their films; imports the said recordings produced abroad without their consent; broadcasts by radio or television by any means including satellite transmission and cable retransmission, as well as the communication to the public.
Without the permission of radio and television organizations: rebroadcasts their broadcasts by any means; presents their broadcasts to the public in places accessible to the public against payment of an entrance fee; fixes their broadcasts on sound or sound and visual recordings, regardless of whether the broadcasts are transmitted by wire or by the air, including by cable or satellite; directly or indirectly, temporarily or permanently reproduces by any means and form, in whole or in part, the fixation of their broadcasts; distributes to the public the recordings containing the fixation or their broadcasts; rents the recordings containing the fixation of their broadcasts; makes available to the public, by wire or wireless means, in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, the fixation of their broadcasts.
If the financial gain sought or the damage caused by the perpetration of an act listed in paragraphs (1) and (2), above, is particularly great, the sanction shall be not less than two years imprisonment and a fine of from 2 to 10 million drachmas. If the guilty party has perpetrated any of the aforementioned acts by profession or at a commercial scale or if the circumstances in connection with the perpetration of the act indicate that the guilty party poses a serious threat to the protection of copyright or related rights, the sanction shall be imprisonment of up to ten (10) years and a fine of from 5 to 10 million drachmas, together with the withdrawal of the trading license of the undertaking which has served as the vehicle for the act. The act shall be likewise deemed to have been perpetrated by way of standard practice if the guilty party has on a previous occasion been convicted of a contravention pursuant to the provisions of the Article or for a violation of the preceding copyright legislation and sentenced to a non-redeemable period of imprisonment. Any infringement of copyright and related rights in the form of felony is tried by the competent Three-member Court of Appeal for Felonies.
Any person who did not pay the remuneration provided for by Article 18, paragraph (3) hereof to a collecting society is punished with the sanction of paragraph (1), (2) and (3). The same sentence is imposed on the debtor who, after the issuance of the decision of the one-member first instance court, does not submit the declaration under the provisions of article 18, par. 6, of this law.
The sanctions specified in paragraph (1), above, shall be applicable likewise to any person who: uses or distributes, or possesses with the intent to distribute, any system or means whose sole purpose is to facilitate the unpermitted removal or neutralization of a technical system used to protect a computer program; manufactures or imports or distributes, or possesses with intent to distribute, equipment and other materials utilizable for the reproduction of a work which do not conform to the specifications determined pursuant to Article 59 of this Law; manufactures or imports or distributes, or possesses with intent to distribute, objects which can thwart the efficacy of the above-mentioned specifications, or engages in an act which can have that result; reproduces or uses a work without utilizing the equipment or without applying the systems specified pursuant to Article 60 of this Law; distributes, or possesses with intent to distribute, a phonogram or film without the special mark or control label specified pursuant to Article 61 of this Law.
Where a sentence of imprisonment is imposed with the option of redeemability, the sum payable for the redemption shall be 10 times the sum specified as per the case in the Penal Code.
Where mitigating circumstances exist, the fine imposed shall not be less than half of the minimum fine imposable as per the case under this Law.
Any person who proceeds to authorized temporary or permanent reproduction of the database, translation, adaptation, arrangement and any other alteration of the database, distribution to the public of the database or of copies thereof, communication, display or performance of the database to the public, is punished by imprisonment of at least one (1) year and a fine of one (1) to five (5) million drachmas.
Any person who proceeds to extraction and/or re-utilization of the whole or of a substantial part of the contents of the database without the authorization of the author thereof, is punished by imprisonment of at least one (1) year and a fine of one (1) to five (5) million drachmas (article 12 of Directive 96/9).
When the object of the infringement refers to computer software, the culpable character of the action, as described in paragraph 1 of article 65A and under the prerequisites provided there, is raised under the condition that the infringer proceeds in the unreserved payment of the administrative fee and the infringement concerns a quantity of up to 50 programs.
When the object of infringement concerns recordings of sound in which a work protected by copyright law has been recorded, the unreserved payment of an administrative fee according to the stipulation of par.2 of article 65A and under the prerequisites provided there, the culpable character of the action is raised under the condition that the infringement concerns a quantity of up to five hundred (500) illegal sound recording carriers.
The payment of the administrative fee and the raising of the culpable character of the action, do not relieve the infringers from the duty of buying off the copyright and related rights or from the duty of compensating and paying the rest expenses to the holders of these rights, according to the provisions of the relevant laws.
In case of recidivism during the same financial year the administrative fee provided for by article 65A doubles.
, The term technological measures means any technology, device or component designed to prevent or restrict unauthorized acts in respect of works or other subject-matter. Effective measures include access control or protection processes like encryption or copy control mechanisms.
It is prohibited to circumvent effective technological measures without permission from the rightholder, when done knowingly or with reasonable grounds to know.
It is prohibited to manufacture, import, distribute, sell, rent, advertise, or possess for commercial purposes devices or services intended to circumvent technological measures.
Violation of the provisions is punishable by imprisonment of at least one year and a fine of 2,900 to 15,000 Euro. It also entails civil sanctions under article 65 of Law 2121/1993.
Rightholders must ensure exceptions for reproduction for private use, teaching, libraries, judicial purposes, or accessibility for people with disabilities. Disputes may be mediated or resolved by the Court of Appeal of Athens.
, 1.A transfer of personal data to a third country or an international organisation may take place where the Commission has decided that the third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within that third country, or the international organisation in question ensures an adequate level of protection. Such a transfer shall not require any specific authorisation.
2.When assessing the adequacy of the level of protection, the Commission shall, in particular, take account of the following elements: (a)  the rule of law, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, relevant legislation, both general and sectoral, including concerning public security, defence, national security and criminal law and the access of public authorities to personal data, as well as the implementation of such legislation, data protection rules, professional rules and security measures, including rules for the onward transfer of personal data to another third country or international organisation which are complied with in that country or international organisation, case-law, as well as effective and enforceable data subject rights and effective administrative and judicial redress for the data subjects whose personal data are being transferred; (b)  the existence and effective functioning of one or more independent supervisory authorities in the third country or to which an international organisation is subject, with responsibility for ensuring and enforcing compliance with the data protection rules, including adequate enforcement powers, for assisting and advising the data subjects in exercising their rights and for cooperation with the supervisory authorities of the Member States; and (c)  the international commitments the third country or international organisation concerned has entered into, or other obligations arising from legally binding conventions or instruments as well as from its participation in multilateral or regional systems, in particular in relation to the protection of personal data.
3.The Commission, after assessing the adequacy of the level of protection, may decide, by means of implementing act, that a third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within a third country, or an international organisation ensures an adequate level of protection within the meaning of paragraph 2 of this Article. The implementing act shall provide for a mechanism for a periodic review, at least every four years, which shall take into account all relevant developments in the third country or international organisation. The implementing act shall specify its territorial and sectoral application and, where applicable, identify the supervisory authority or authorities referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2 of this Article. The implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2).
4.The Commission shall, on an ongoing basis, monitor developments in third countries and international organisations that could affect the functioning of decisions adopted pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article and decisions adopted on the basis of Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC.
5.The Commission shall, where available information reveals, in particular following the review referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article, that a third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within a third country, or an international organisation no longer ensures an adequate level of protection within the meaning of paragraph 2 of this Article, to the extent necessary, repeal, amend or suspend the decision referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article by means of implementing acts without retro-active effect. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 93(2). On duly justified imperative grounds of urgency, the Commission shall adopt immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 93(3).
6.The Commission shall enter into consultations with the third country or international organisation with a view to remedying the situation giving rise to the decision made pursuant to paragraph 5
7.A decision pursuant to paragraph 5 of this Article is without prejudice to transfers of personal data to the third country, a territory or one or more specified sectors within that third country, or the international organisation in question pursuant to Articles 46 to 49
8.The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union and on its website a list of the third countries, territories and specified sectors within a third country and international organisations for which it has decided that an adequate level of protection is or is no longer ensured.
9.Decisions adopted by the Commission on the basis of Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC shall remain in force until amended, replaced or repealed by a Commission Decision adopted in accordance with paragraph 3 or 5 of this Article., source_sentence: What remedy is available to a data subject if their rights are infringed?
sentences: 1.The controller shall consult the supervisory authority prior to processing where a data protection impact assessment under Article 35 indicates that the processing would result in a high risk in the absence of measures taken by the controller to mitigate the risk.
2.Where the supervisory authority is of the opinion that the intended processing referred to in paragraph 1 would infringe this Regulation, in particular where the controller has insufficiently identified or mitigated the risk, the supervisory authority shall, within period of up to eight weeks of receipt of the request for consultation, provide written advice to the controller and, where applicable to the processor, and may use any of its powers referred to in Article 58. That period may be extended by six weeks, taking into account the complexity of the intended processing. The supervisory authority shall inform the controller and, where applicable, the processor, of any such extension within one month of receipt of the request for consultation together with the reasons for the delay. Those periods may be suspended until the supervisory authority has obtained information it has requested for the purposes of the consultation.
3.When consulting the supervisory authority pursuant to paragraph 1, the controller shall provide the supervisory authority with: (a)  where applicable, the respective responsibilities of the controller, joint controllers and processors involved in the processing, in particular for processing within a group of undertakings; (b)  the purposes and means of the intended processing; (c)  the measures and safeguards provided to protect the rights and freedoms of data subjects pursuant to this Regulation; (d)  where applicable, the contact details of the data protection officer; 4.5.2016 L 119/54   (e)  the data protection impact assessment provided for in Article 35; and (f)  any other information requested by the supervisory authority.
4.Member States shall consult the supervisory authority during the preparation of a proposal for a legislative measure to be adopted by a national parliament, or of a regulatory measure based on such a legislative measure, which relates to processing.
5.Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member State law may require controllers to consult with, and obtain prior authorisation from, the supervisory authority in relation to processing by a controller for the performance of a task carried out by the controller in the public interest, including processing in relation to social protection and public health, 1.Without prejudice to any available administrative or non-judicial remedy, including the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority pursuant to Article 77, each data subject shall have the right to an effective judicial remedy where he or she considers that his or her rights under this Regulation have been infringed as a result of the processing of his or her personal data in non-compliance with this Regulation.
2.Proceedings against a controller or a processor shall be brought before the courts of the Member State where the controller or processor has an establishment. Alternatively, such proceedings may be brought before the courts of the Member State where the data subject has his or her habitual residence, unless the controller or processor is a public authority of a Member State acting in the exercise of its public powers. 4.5.2016 L 119/80   (1) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43)., Court (Civil/Criminal): Criminal  
Provisions:   
Time of commission of the act:  
Result (not guilty, guilty): Guilty  
Reasoning: DECLARES the defendant guilty of: In Athens, between the period from July 25, 2005, to July 26, 2005, for profit and with the intent to conceal the true origin and to assist a person involved in criminal activity, intentionally concealed any property and became the beneficiary of it, which originated from the aforementioned activity, specifically from fraud by means of computer data manipulation, causing particularly significant damage, with the perpetrator committing fraud professionally, and the circumstances under which this act was committed indicating that he is particularly dangerous. He engages in money laundering activities professionally and is considered particularly dangerous.  
Factual circumstances: An unknown individual, using social engineering techniques and information that had been intercepted (password, passport details, etc.), pretended over the phone to be the legitimate beneficiary of a bank account and managed to change the registered phone number, gain access to the account, and illegally transfer the amount of $427,620 to an account in Greece. The transfer was carried out via email, using the online banking system. The actual pair of beneficiaries of the account never requested a money transfer, a change of phone number, or a change of access codes. The person who received the money and his company, while being aware of the criminal origin of the funds, proceeded to conceal them by hiding them in the corporate account. Furthermore, the unknown individual attempted other similar money transfers (e.g., $125,000 to Texas, $321,650 to Japan), demonstrating repeated, organized, and professional activity. The court considered his actions to be particularly dangerous and antisocial, with evidence indicating a consistent tendency towards committing similar crimes. There was also previous infrastructure for committing the fraud, such as an account in a company in the Seychelles, the use of a false address, orders via fax, and correspondence with fictitious details.  

Legal characterization: Professional and continuous fraud, Use of forged/intercepted identification documents, Money laundering, Assistance in criminal activity with the aim of obtaining property benefits.
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 Legal Matryoshka
results: task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 768
type: dim_768
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.39141414141414144
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 0.42676767676767674
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 0.45202020202020204
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 0.5202020202020202
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.39141414141414144
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.3754208754208754
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.34898989898989896
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.3058080808080808
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.08316151616341011
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 0.20478522043960917
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 0.26995773900815695
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 0.37818665102168236
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.4456079970188684
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.4170815295815295
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.4895384448163942
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no, task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 512
type: dim_512
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.3888888888888889
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 0.42676767676767674
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 0.4494949494949495
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 0.5050505050505051
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.3888888888888889
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.3745791245791245
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.35050505050505054
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.30328282828282827
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.08095031341341426
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 0.2000426489944515
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 0.2687108272498816
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 0.3701058475008697
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.4411741415541583
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.4137796616963283
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.48714458942677913
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no, task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 256
type: dim_256
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.3813131313131313
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 0.4166666666666667
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 0.43434343434343436
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 0.494949494949495
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.3813131313131313
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.36700336700336694
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.3393939393939394
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.2957070707070707
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.07902861668209107
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 0.19816539550081866
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 0.25937181843660423
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 0.35818491028278
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.43050019360928926
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.4046476671476672
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.4765330594899489
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no, task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 128
type: dim_128
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.3888888888888889
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 0.4065656565656566
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 0.42676767676767674
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 0.4898989898989899
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.3888888888888889
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.3712121212121212
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.34292929292929286
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.29873737373737375
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.0762766300106295
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 0.192382078584077
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 0.2556394493094467
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 0.3572486503178118
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.4298735099412033
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.40777617444284114
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.4726545958174245
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no, task: type: information-retrieval
name: Information Retrieval
dataset: name: dim 64
type: dim_64
metrics: type: cosine_accuracy@1
value: 0.3560606060606061
name: Cosine Accuracy@1
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@3
value: 0.3888888888888889
name: Cosine Accuracy@3
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@5
value: 0.40404040404040403
name: Cosine Accuracy@5
verified: no, type: cosine_accuracy@10
value: 0.44191919191919193
name: Cosine Accuracy@10
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@1
value: 0.3560606060606061
name: Cosine Precision@1
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@3
value: 0.34259259259259256
name: Cosine Precision@3
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@5
value: 0.3181818181818181
name: Cosine Precision@5
verified: no, type: cosine_precision@10
value: 0.271969696969697
name: Cosine Precision@10
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@1
value: 0.0732426728279654
name: Cosine Recall@1
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@3
value: 0.1823988665534512
name: Cosine Recall@3
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@5
value: 0.24290435952694314
name: Cosine Recall@5
verified: no, type: cosine_recall@10
value: 0.3265684847777325
name: Cosine Recall@10
verified: no, type: cosine_ndcg@10
value: 0.3953843650957939
name: Cosine Ndcg@10
verified: no, type: cosine_mrr@10
value: 0.37502605419272084
name: Cosine Mrr@10
verified: no, type: cosine_map@100
value: 0.44223668554391404
name: Cosine Map@100
verified: no
Likes: 0 | All-time downloads: 36
Created: 2025-07-13 11:19:43