Evaluates long-context financial reasoning and context retrieval capabilities. It probes whether models can accurately retrieve relevant sections from lengthy SEC reports and answer numerical questions grounded in those documents. Use when the user wants to benchmark on DocFinQA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports HR@k.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill docfinqa-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Docfinqa Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-docfinqa-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: docfinqa-eval
description: Evaluates long-context financial reasoning and context retrieval capabilities. It probes whether models can accurately retrieve relevant sections from lengthy SEC reports and answer numerical questions grounded in those documents. Use when the user wants to benchmark on DocFinQA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports HR@k.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2401.06915
bibtex_key: reddy2024docfinqa
confidence: high
---
# docfinqa-eval
> DocFinQA: A Long-Context Financial Reasoning Dataset — Varshini Reddy et al. (2024) (arXiv:2401.06915, 2024)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates long-context financial reasoning and context retrieval capabilities. It probes whether models can accurately retrieve relevant sections from lengthy SEC reports and answer numerical questions grounded in those documents.
## Datasets
- **DocFinQA** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1)
## Metrics
- `HR@k` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Hit Rate at k: the fraction of queries where the ground-truth relevant chunk is ranked within the top-k retrieved chunks.
- `accuracy` — range: percent
- Exact match accuracy of the generated answer against the ground-truth numerical answer or Python program.
## Input / output format
**Input**: For retrieval: a question q and a set of document chunks C. For QA: a question q and k retrieved chunks provided as in-context examples.
**Output**: For retrieval: the index or rank of the retrieved chunk. For QA: a natural language or numerical answer.
## Scoring recipe
```python
# Retrieval HR@k
hr_at_k = sum(1 for q in queries if target_chunk_idx in top_k_indices[q]) / len(queries)
# QA Accuracy
accuracy = sum(1 for q in queries if normalize(generated_answer[q]) == normalize(gold_answer[q])) / len(queries)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Retrieval performance is highly sensitive to the embedding model; fine-tuned ColBERT significantly outperforms pre-trained baselines.
- LLM accuracy strongly depends on the few-shot configuration and context length, with generic LLMs preferring shorter contexts + more shots, while code-trained LLMs prefer longer contexts.
- Proprietary models like GPT-3 and BloombergGPT were excluded due to API inaccessibility, limiting direct comparison with the latest commercial baselines.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We evaluate these models using HR@k on the test set of DocFinQA using the target $c^{igstar}.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{reddy2024docfinqa,
title={DocFinQA: A Long-Context Financial Reasoning Dataset},
author={Varshini Reddy et al. (2024)},
year={2024},
note={arXiv:2401.06915}
}
```
- arXiv: 2401.06915
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!