This benchmark tests a system's ability to retrieve relevant evidence snippets from a large pool of web pages for a given Arabic claim. It evaluates ranking performance in a retrieval setting where only a small fraction of snippets actually contain verifying evidence. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Arabic Evidence Retrieval Dataset, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports P@10.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill arabic-evidence-retrieval-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Arabic Evidence Retrieval Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-arabic-evidence-retrieval-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: arabic-evidence-retrieval-eval
description: This benchmark tests a system's ability to retrieve relevant evidence snippets from a large pool of web pages for a given Arabic claim. It evaluates ranking performance in a retrieval setting where only a small fraction of snippets actually contain verifying evidence. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Arabic Evidence Retrieval Dataset, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports P@10.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2007.07997
bibtex_key: barroncedeno2020checkthat
confidence: high
---
# arabic-evidence-retrieval-eval
> Overview of CheckThat! 2020: Automatic Identification and Verification of Claims in Social Media — Barrón-Cedeno et al. (2020) (arXiv:2007.07997, 2020)
## What this evaluates
This benchmark tests a system's ability to retrieve relevant evidence snippets from a large pool of web pages for a given Arabic claim. It evaluates ranking performance in a retrieval setting where only a small fraction of snippets actually contain verifying evidence.
## Datasets
- **Arabic Evidence Retrieval Dataset** — total 169902; splits: test (169902)
## Metrics
- `P@10` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Precision at cutoff k=10, measuring the proportion of retrieved snippets that contain useful evidence among the top 10 results.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Arabic claim text and a list of candidate web page snippets.
**Output**: Ranked list of evidence snippets.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def score(predictions, gold):
top_k = predictions[:10]
relevant_in_top_k = len(set(top_k) & gold)
return relevant_in_top_k / 10.0
```
## Common pitfalls
- Evaluation relies on a pooling method: only snippets returned by systems are annotated, which may bias precision estimates.
- Snippets are automatically split by punctuation, which might not align with semantic evidence boundaries.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> In order to evaluate the submitted runs, we computed P@k at different cutoff (k = 1, 5, 10). The official measure was P@10.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{barroncedeno2020checkthat,
title={Overview of CheckThat! 2020: Automatic Identification and Verification of Claims in Social Media},
author={Barrón-Cedeno et al. (2020)},
year={2020},
note={arXiv:2007.07997}
}
```
- arXiv: 2007.07997
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!