Evaluates the effectiveness of a high-quality Chinese pre-training corpus by training a 0.5B language model from scratch and measuring its zero-shot generalization across standard English and Chinese knowledge benchmarks. The protocol also includes a comparative analysis of data quality classifiers using macro F1-score on a held-out test set. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Standard Benchmarks (ARC-C, ARC-E, HellaSwag, Winograd, MMLU, OpenbookQA, PIQA, SIQA, CEval, CMMLU), or asks abo...
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Cci30 Hq Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-cci30-hq-eval)
---
name: cci30-hq-eval
description: Evaluates the effectiveness of a high-quality Chinese pre-training corpus by training a 0.5B language model from scratch and measuring its zero-shot generalization across standard English and Chinese knowledge benchmarks. The protocol also includes a comparative analysis of data quality classifiers using macro F1-score on a held-out test set. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Standard Benchmarks (ARC-C, ARC-E, HellaSwag, Winograd, MMLU, OpenbookQA, PIQA, SIQA, CEval, CMMLU), or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Average.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2410.18505
bibtex_key: wang2024cci30hq
confidence: high
---
# cci30-hq-eval
> CCI3.0-HQ: a large-scale Chinese dataset of high quality designed for pre-training large language models — Wang et al. (2024) (arXiv:2410.18505, 2024)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the effectiveness of a high-quality Chinese pre-training corpus by training a 0.5B language model from scratch and measuring its zero-shot generalization across standard English and Chinese knowledge benchmarks. The protocol also includes a comparative analysis of data quality classifiers using macro F1-score on a held-out test set.
## Datasets
- **Standard Benchmarks (ARC-C, ARC-E, HellaSwag, Winograd, MMLU, OpenbookQA, PIQA, SIQA, CEval, CMMLU)** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `Average` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Arithmetic mean of zero-shot accuracy scores across 10 standard benchmarks (ARC-C, ARC-E, HellaSwag, Winograd, MMLU, OpenbookQA, PIQA, SIQA, CEval, CMMLU).
## Input / output format
**Input**: Zero-shot natural language prompts corresponding to each benchmark task (multiple-choice or open-ended QA).
**Output**: Model-generated text or selected option corresponding to the ground truth answer.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_average_accuracy(predictions, golds, benchmarks):
task_scores = []
for task in benchmarks:
acc = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions[task], golds[task]) if p == g) / len(golds[task])
task_scores.append(acc)
return sum(task_scores) / len(task_scores)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Benchmarks are evaluated in zero-shot mode, unlike standard few-shot protocols for tasks like MMLU.
- The 'Average' metric treats all 10 benchmarks equally despite varying difficulty and domain coverage.
- Classifier evaluation uses a fixed 0-5 score threshold of 3.0, which may not align with optimal precision-recall trade-offs across different data distributions.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Evaluation metrics include: Average_Chinese : Average score of Chinese metrics, including CEval and CMMLU. Average_English : Average score across standard English metrics such as ARC-C, ARC-E, HellaSwag, Winograd, MMLU, OpenbookQA, PIQA and SIQA. Average: Combined average score of all evaluation metrics above.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{wang2024cci30hq,
title={CCI3.0-HQ: a large-scale Chinese dataset of high quality designed for pre-training large language models},
author={Wang et al. (2024)},
year={2024},
note={arXiv:2410.18505}
}
```
- arXiv: 2410.18505