Perhaps you should try some spelling variations:
"coder coder using sequence embedding" » "coder coder using sentence embedding" (Expand search), "coder coder using sentence embeddings" (Expand search), "coder coder using sequence emerging" (Expand search), "coder coder using frequency embedding" (Expand search), "coder coder single sequence embedding" (Expand search), "coder coder mixing sequence embedding" (Expand search), "coder decoder using sequence embedding" (Expand search), "code code using sequence embedding" (Expand search), "decoder codec using sequence embedding" (Expand search), "coder coders using sequence embedding" (Expand search), "coder cover using sequence embedding" (Expand search), "coder code using sequence embedding" (Expand search)
"in python python python programming" » "in pythons python python programming" (Expand search), "in piton python python programming" (Expand search), "in pitons python python programming" (Expand search), "_ python python python programming" (Expand search)

You may be able to get more results by adjusting your search query.

• The words AND, OR and NOT may confuse the search; try adding quotes: "((\"coder coder using sequence embedding\") OR (\"in python python python programming\"))~".
• Removing quotes may allow a broader search: (( coder coder using sequence embedding ) OR ( in python python python programming ))~.
• Adding a wildcard symbol may retrieve word variants: (("coder coder using sequence embedding") OR ("in python python python programming"))*.