Evaluates Open Information Extraction systems on their ability to extract compact, clause-level facts from text. It measures precision, recall, and F1 using token-level matching against gold triples, with a focus on avoiding over-specific extractions and handling overlapping constituents. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CaRB, Wire57, BenchIE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill compactie-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Compactie Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-compactie-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: compactie-eval
description: Evaluates Open Information Extraction systems on their ability to extract compact, clause-level facts from text. It measures precision, recall, and F1 using token-level matching against gold triples, with a focus on avoiding over-specific extractions and handling overlapping constituents. Use when the user wants to benchmark on CaRB, Wire57, BenchIE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2205.02880
bibtex_key: fatahibayat2022compactie
confidence: high
---
# compactie-eval
> CompactIE: Compact Facts in Open Information Extraction — Fatahi Bayat et al. (2022) (arXiv:2205.02880, 2022)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates Open Information Extraction systems on their ability to extract compact, clause-level facts from text. It measures precision, recall, and F1 using token-level matching against gold triples, with a focus on avoiding over-specific extractions and handling overlapping constituents.
## Datasets
- **CaRB** — total 641; splits: test (577); repo https://github.com/dair-iitd/CaRB
- **Wire57** — total 57; splits: test (56); repo https://github.com/rali-udem/WiRe57
- **BenchIE** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `F1` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Standard F1 score (harmonic mean of precision and recall) computed using dataset-specific token-level matching scoring functions.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Input sentences (pre-processed to remove conjunctions).
**Output**: A set of Open Information Extraction triples (subject, relation, object).
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_f1(pred_triples, gold_triples):
tp = sum(1 for p in pred_triples if any(token_match(p, g) for g in gold_triples))
fp = len(pred_triples) - tp
fn = len(gold_triples) - tp
prec = tp / (tp + fp) if (tp + fp) > 0 else 0.0
rec = tp / (tp + fn) if (tp + fn) > 0 else 0.0
return 2 * prec * rec / (prec + rec) if (prec + rec) > 0 else 0.0
```
## Common pitfalls
- CaRB and Wire57 are incomplete benchmarks; gold sets do not include all acceptable surface realizations, which can artificially suppress recall.
- Scoring functions explicitly penalize over-specific extractions, requiring models to balance compactness with recall.
- Pre-processing steps (e.g., removing conjunctions, excluding triples with clauses inside constituents) must be applied consistently for fair comparison.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We report precision (P), recall (R), and F1 computed by these scoring functions. Wire57 contains more fine-grained extractions than the CaRB dataset and its scoring function is more rigorous for compact facts since it penalizes over-specific extractions. However, both CaRB and Wire57 scoring functions are based on token-level matching of system extractions against ground truth facts.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{fatahibayat2022compactie,
title={CompactIE: Compact Facts in Open Information Extraction},
author={Fatahi Bayat et al. (2022)},
year={2022},
note={arXiv:2205.02880}
}
```
- arXiv: 2205.02880
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!