## 5 Experiments and Analysis of Results
### Chinese and English Punctuation and Choice of Symbol Types  
This section explored whether replacing English symbols with Chinese symbols would have an effect on the model. Furthermore, as question marks and exclamation marks may affect the tone or emotion of the sentence, the experiment also tried to remove these symbols. Then the effect of expanding the choice of more symbols (e.g., adding \"[\", \"]\", \"\(\sim\)\", \"\(\mid\)\", etc.) on the model. For the number of symbols inserted into the input text, the optimal number of symbols to be inserted for each model as experimented with in 5.2 was used. In Table 12, for the \"bert-base\" model, the effect is weaker than that of English punctuation when the symbols are replaced with Chinese punctuation, indicating that Chinese punctuation has a greater influence on the semantics of sentences than English punctuation. However, if only Chinese punctuation is used, it still has a positive effect on the model. In addition, English exclamation marks and English question marks, which have a strong tone, do not have a significant impact on the semantics of Chinese sentences, and the addition of other special punctuation marks does not effectively improve the model performance. In Table 13, for the \"roberta-base\" model, the performance of the model is weaker than that of the English punctuation model when the symbols inserted in the input of the model become Chinese symbols. The insertion of both Chinese punctuation and the strong semantic symbols in Chinese punctuation seems to have a negative impact on the semantic understanding of the sentence, making the insertion weaker than the original model. In contrast, strong punctuation in English does not negatively affect the model, but the positive effect on the model does not continue to grow when the choice of English symbols inserted is expanded. As shown in Table 14, the effect of adding Chinese punctuation to the input on the performance of the 'roberta-large' model is almost negligible, but it also indicates that the addition of Chinese punctuation does not have a beneficial effect on the model, and the strong tone symbols in Chinese do not seem to have much effect on the sentence meaning. Similar to the experimental results in the previous two models, the inclusion of strong tone \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Operation** & **ATEC** & **BQ** & **LCQMC** & **PAWS-X** & **STS-B** & **Mean** \\ \hline no-operation & 34.11 & 50.18 & 65.39 & 10.27 & 29.54 & 37.89 \\ EdaCSE & 33.90 & 51.52 & 67.76 & 10.92 & 29.56 & 38.73 \\ Change it to Chinese symbols & 32.74 & 51.42 & 66.72 & 8.63 & 29.48 & 37.79 \\ The Chinese symbol is removed from the “\(\gamma\)”, “\(\gamma\)” & 31.49 & 51 & 67.23 & 9.98 & 29.33 & 37.80 \\ The English symbol to remove the “\(\gamma\)”, “\(\gamma\)” & 33.93 & 51.29 & 65.04 & 10.3 & 29.37 & 37.98 \\ Add additional English symbols & 33.23 & 51.15 & 66.53 & 10.49 & 28.99 & 38.07 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 13: An exploration of Chinese and English punctuation-related issues based on the roberta-base model. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Operation** & **ATEC** & **BQ** & **LCQMC** & **PAWS-X** & **STS-B** & **Mean** \\ \hline no-operation & 33.38 & 50.51 & 62.00 & 9.46 & 27.29 & 36.52 \\ EdaCSE & 34.23 & 50.67 & 64.9 & 10.15 & 27.76 & 37.54 \\ Change it to Chinese symbols & 33.07 & 51.02 & 63.86 & 8.63 & 27.48 & 36.81 \\ The Chinese symbol is removed from the “\(\gamma\)”, “\(\gamma\)” & 33.28 & 50.74 & 63.91 & 9.45 & 26.53 & 36.78 \\ The English symbol to remove the “\(\gamma\)”, “\(\gamma\)” & 32.93 & 50.29 & 63.04 & 9.3 & 27.37 & 36.58 \\ Add additional English symbols & 33.1 & 51.15 & 62.53 & 9.49 & 26.37 & 36.52 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 12: An exploration of Chinese and English punctuation-related issues based on the bert-base model.