Skip to content
Back to skills

Climatecheck Eval

ASecurity

Tests the ability to retrieve relevant scholarly abstracts for climate change claims from social media and classify the relationship between claims and abstracts as supporting, refuting, or inconclusive. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ClimateCheck, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Recall@10.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 11, 2026
researchpythongo

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill climatecheck-eval --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Climatecheck Eval?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Climatecheck Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-climatecheck-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-climatecheck-eval)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: climatecheck-eval
description: Tests the ability to retrieve relevant scholarly abstracts for climate change claims from social media and classify the relationship between claims and abstracts as supporting, refuting, or inconclusive. Use when the user wants to benchmark on ClimateCheck, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Recall@10.
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2509.22141
  bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
  confidence: high
---

# climatecheck-eval

> NFDI4DS Shared Tasks for Scholarly Document Processing — Abu Ahmad et al. (2025) (arXiv:2509.22141, 2025)

## What this evaluates

Tests the ability to retrieve relevant scholarly abstracts for climate change claims from social media and classify the relationship between claims and abstracts as supporting, refuting, or inconclusive.

## Datasets

- **ClimateCheck** — total 435; splits: train (-1), test (-1); HF `rabuahmad/climatecheck`; repo https://sdproc.org/2025/climatecheck.html

## Metrics

- `Recall@10` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
  - Proportion of claims where the correct abstract is ranked within the top 10 retrieved results.

## Input / output format

**Input**: Social media claim (atomic tweet-styled statement).

**Output**: Top-10 ranked scholarly abstracts (Subtask I) and relation classification (supports/refutes/not enough information) for retrieved pairs (Subtask II).

## Scoring recipe

```python
retrieved_abstracts = model.retrieve_top_k(claim, k=10)
recall_at_10 = 1 if gold_abstract in retrieved_abstracts else 0
pred_relations = model.classify_relations(claim, retrieved_abstracts)
f1_score = f1_score(gold_relations, pred_relations)
```

## Common pitfalls

- Subtask I evaluates retrieval (Recall@10, Bpref) while Subtask II evaluates classification (F1) on the retrieved set, which can be conflated in leaderboard reporting.
- The dataset is small (435 claims), making aggregate metrics highly sensitive to individual claim difficulty and annotation noise.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> Subtask I of ClimateCheck focused on retrieving the top 10 relevant abstracts per claim, evaluated using Recall@K as well as Binary Preference (Bpref), while subtask II asked participants to classify the relation of each claim-abstract pair they retrieved, evaluated using F1-score with additional scaling based on successful retrieval. The top team achieved a Recall@10 score of 0.66, Bpref of 0.49 (subtask I), and and F1 of 0.73 (subtask II).

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{abuhmad2025nfdi4ds,
  title={NFDI4DS Shared Tasks for Scholarly Document Processing},
  author={Abu Ahmad et al. (2025)},
  year={2025},
  note={arXiv:2509.22141}
}
```

- arXiv: 2509.22141

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.