This benchmark evaluates Arabic language models on healthcare-related question answering, specifically probing their ability to classify mental health conditions and generate culturally appropriate medical advice. It tests both discriminative capabilities (multi-label classification and multiple-choice selection) and generative capabilities (open-ended response generation) in clinical and mental health contexts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on AraHealthQA, or asks about evaluating thi...
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill arahahealthqa-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Arahahealthqa Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-arahahealthqa-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: arahahealthqa-eval
description: This benchmark evaluates Arabic language models on healthcare-related question answering, specifically probing their ability to classify mental health conditions and generate culturally appropriate medical advice. It tests both discriminative capabilities (multi-label classification and multiple-choice selection) and generative capabilities (open-ended response generation) in clinical and mental health contexts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on AraHealthQA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Weighted-F1.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2508.20047
bibtex_key: alhuzali2025arahahealthqa
confidence: high
---
# arahahealthqa-eval
> AraHealthQA 2025: The First Shared Task on Arabic Health Question Answering — Alhuzali et al. (2025) (arXiv:2508.20047, 2025)
## What this evaluates
This benchmark evaluates Arabic language models on healthcare-related question answering, specifically probing their ability to classify mental health conditions and generate culturally appropriate medical advice. It tests both discriminative capabilities (multi-label classification and multiple-choice selection) and generative capabilities (open-ended response generation) in clinical and mental health contexts.
## Datasets
- **AraHealthQA** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `Weighted-F1` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- F1 score calculated per class and averaged, weighted by the number of true instances for each class. Used as the primary ranking metric for classification subtasks.
- `Jaccard Score` — range: [0, 1]
- The size of the intersection divided by the size of the union of the predicted and gold label sets: |A ∩ B| / |A ∪ B|.
- `BERTScore` — range: [0, 1]
- Computes cosine similarity between contextualized BERT embeddings of the generated response and the reference text, then averages the maximum similarities across tokens.
- `Accuracy` — range: [0, 1]
- Proportion of correctly predicted multiple-choice options out of the total number of instances.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Arabic text containing a health-related question, optionally accompanied by multiple-choice options. For generative subtasks, the input is the question alone; for classification, it may include candidate labels or categories.
**Output**: For classification subtasks: a set of predicted label(s) or a single selected option. For generative subtasks: a free-form Arabic text response. Predictions must be parseable as label sets or strings for automated scoring.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(preds, golds):
f1s, jaccs, berts, accs = [], [], [], []
for p, g in zip(preds, golds):
p_set, g_set = set(p), set(g)
jaccs.append(len(p_set & g_set) / len(p_set | g_set) if (p_set | g_set) else 0)
tp, fp, fn = len(p_set & g_set), len(p_set - g_set), len(g_set - p_set)
prec = tp / (tp + fp) if (tp + fp) else 0
rec = tp / (tp + fn) if (tp + fn) else 0
f1s.append(2 * prec * rec / (prec + rec) if (prec + rec) else 0)
berts.append(bertscore.compute(p, g))
accs.append(1 if p == g else 0)
return {'Weighted-F1': np.mean(f1s), 'Jaccard Score': np.mean(jaccs), 'BERTScore': np.mean(berts), 'Accuracy': np.mean(accs)}
```
## Common pitfalls
- Automatic metrics like BERTScore may overestimate model quality by capturing lexical overlap without verifying clinical accuracy or cultural sensitivity.
- Frequency-based baselines can achieve deceptively high Jaccard scores while performing poorly on Weighted-F1, masking poor precision and recall.
- Small test set sizes in certain subtasks lead to low variance between systems, making statistical significance of rankings difficult to assess.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The results of Subtask 1 shown in Table[2] reveal a range of performances among participating teams, with Weighted-F1 scores spanning from 0.61 to 0.24 as presented in Table [2]. The top-performing system, mucAI, achieved a Weighted-F1 of 0.61 and a Jaccard score of 0.53, closely followed by Binary_Bunch with nearly identical results.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{alhuzali2025arahahealthqa,
title={AraHealthQA 2025: The First Shared Task on Arabic Health Question Answering},
author={Alhuzali et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2508.20047}
}
```
- arXiv: 2508.20047
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!