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...
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill cci30-hq-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls 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 automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-cci30-hq-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
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
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!