Skip to content
Back to skills

Egmm Corpus Eval

ASecurity

Probes zero-shot visual-language alignment and cultural recognition capabilities of vision-language models on Egyptian cultural concepts. It measures how well models can classify images into specific cultural categories and retrieve matching text descriptions without fine-tuning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on EgMM-Corpus, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Acc@1.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 3 views
  • Added September 11, 2026
researchpythongoaws

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

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

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Egmm Corpus Eval?

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

Security grade badge for Egmm Corpus Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-egmm-corpus-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-egmm-corpus-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: egmm-corpus-eval
description: Probes zero-shot visual-language alignment and cultural recognition capabilities of vision-language models on Egyptian cultural concepts. It measures how well models can classify images into specific cultural categories and retrieve matching text descriptions without fine-tuning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on EgMM-Corpus, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Acc@1.
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2510.16198
  bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
  confidence: high
---

# egmm-corpus-eval

> EgMM-Corpus: A Multimodal Vision-Language Dataset for Egyptian Culture — Gamil et al. (2025) (arXiv:2510.16198, 2025)

## What this evaluates

Probes zero-shot visual-language alignment and cultural recognition capabilities of vision-language models on Egyptian cultural concepts. It measures how well models can classify images into specific cultural categories and retrieve matching text descriptions without fine-tuning.

## Datasets

- **EgMM-Corpus** — total 3000; splits: test (995)

## Metrics

- `Acc@1` **(primary)** — range: percent
  - Top-1 accuracy: the fraction of images where the correct cultural concept name is ranked first among all candidate labels.
- `Acc@5` — range: percent
  - Top-5 accuracy: the fraction of images where the correct concept appears within the top five predicted labels.
- `I2T R@1` — range: percent
  - Image-to-Text Recall@1: the fraction of image queries where the correct text description is ranked first.
- `T2I R@1` — range: percent
  - Text-to-Image Recall@1: the fraction of text queries where the correct image is ranked first.
- `I2T R@5` — range: percent
  - Image-to-Text Recall@5: the fraction of image queries where the correct text description appears in the top five results.

## Input / output format

**Input**: For classification: an image and a fixed set of candidate text labels (cultural concept names). For retrieval: an image paired with all text descriptions in the corpus, or a text query paired with all images.

**Output**: A ranked list of candidate labels (classification) or a ranked list of images/texts (retrieval) based on model similarity scores.

## Scoring recipe

```python
# Classification
acc1 = sum(1 for pred, gold in zip(preds, golds) if pred == gold) / len(golds)
acc5 = sum(1 for top5, gold in zip(top5_preds, golds) if gold in top5) / len(golds)

# Retrieval (I2T)
r1 = sum(1 for img, gold_txt in zip(images, gold_texts) if gold_txt in rank_texts(img, k=1)) / len(gold_texts)
r5 = sum(1 for img, gold_txt in zip(images, gold_texts) if gold_txt in rank_texts(img, k=5)) / len(gold_texts)
```

## Common pitfalls

- The evaluation uses a strict zero-shot setting, so low scores reflect pre-training data gaps rather than model architecture flaws or lack of fine-tuning.
- Retrieval metrics are evaluated in both directions (I2T and T2I), which often yield asymmetric scores due to vocabulary-image distribution mismatches.
- The reported 995-image sample is a subset of the full 3,000+ corpus, so results may not represent the complete dataset's difficulty or distribution.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> For zero-shot classification, each image is matched against all concept names, and we report Top-1 and Top-5 accuracy. For retrieval, we adopt Recall@K (R@K)-a standard measure in cross-modal learning-evaluated in both directions: Image-to-Text (I2T): each image query is used to rank all textual descriptions. R@K represents the fraction of images for which the correct text appears among the top K retrieved results. Text-to-Image (T2I): each textual concept query is used to rank all images. R@K measures the percentage of times the correct image is found within the top K results. We primarily report R@1 (strict correctness) and R@5 (top-5 relevance) to provide a comprehensive view of CLIP’s visual–textual alignment in a zero-shot setting.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{gamil2025egmmcorpus,
  title={EgMM-Corpus: A Multimodal Vision-Language Dataset for Egyptian Culture},
  author={Gamil et al. (2025)},
  year={2025},
  note={arXiv:2510.16198}
}
```

- arXiv: 2510.16198

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.