mahjongmen

thanks for the kind words - we're always looking for ways to make our documentation more of a delight :)

Thank you sir! I appreciate you.

That sounds really cool! Would love to better understand your use-case and make sure it works well for you!

Drop me an email at [email protected]

Hey Luke, Our model does exceptionally well on text and images, and in particular, when text and images are mixed together. An example of where this works well would be in E-commerce where you may have a product title, description, and multiple images of the product. When combining that into a single payload using our inputs parameter we find that our model responds really well to adding more images (i.e. retrieval quality moves up as you add 1,2,3....N images). As you pointed out with Google's multimodal model, most jointly trained multimodal embedding models will suffer in the text modality. Amazon used to have a multimodal embedding model, which also took in a very small text payload. We're thinking about Audio / Video as well but nothing for Q2 at least....

Hey Serjester Email me at [email protected], let's arrange time to chat. We did head to head evals with Voyage Large / Voyage Multimodal and I can share them with you if you are serious about moving your embeddings over. We tested configurations of top open-source, closed-source, multi-vector and single-dense embedding models but I can only choose so many to put on a graph and I'm not in the business of giving Voyage free advertising haha. I agree with you that there is some complexity on multi-modal reranking w.r.t to inference time speeds as well as data transfer / network latency costs. Happy to talk more :)

I'll start off with, I'm not one of our founders and REALLY wouldn't want to be publicly held accountable for policies or commitments until I've been able to get internal alignment on things I say.

That being said, since I do manage our Search and Retrieval offering, if we were to deprecate any of our embedding models (which is generally the risk of closed-source models), I will make sure that there is an "escape hatch" for users.

Heard on what your concerns are though :)

Which benchmark are you referring to?

Voyage-3-large is a text-only and much larger model than Embed-v4. If you want to unlock multimodality with Voyage-3-large, you'd have to either OCR (really bad results usually) or use a VLM to parse your data into textual descriptions (this works alright, but the cost of using a VLM will jack-up your data-pre-processing costs).

Hey!

Since we focus on Enterprise use-cases, we made sure to include training data from domains like you mentioned above. While in very specific use-cases finetuning may be helpful, but we also do offer that as a customization service (just not available via SaaS)

Hey Simon,

Elliott here from Cohere.

We benchmarked against Nomic's models on our consortium of datasets ranging from text-only, image-only, and mixed modalities. Without publishing additional benchmarks, I am confident in saying that our model is more performant.

At Cohere, for our embed models, we have not deprecated any of our embedding models since we started (I know because I've been there that long) and if we were to start doing so, I would take into account the worry of ensuring our users have a way of accessing our models.

One aspect here that isn't factored is also efficiency. Yes there might be strong open weight models but if you're punching at the 7bn+ weight class your serving requirements are vastly different from a throughput efficiency perspective (also your query-inference speed).

All food for thought. That being said, if for your use-case, Nomic Embed Vision 1.5 is better than Embed-v4.0, happy to hop on a call to discuss where the differential may be.