Evaluates the quality of text embeddings across diverse tasks including retrieval, classification, clustering, and semantic similarity. It probes multilingual, cross-lingual, and code understanding capabilities, measuring how well dense vector representations capture semantic relationships for downstream applications. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MTEB (Massive Text Embedding Benchmark), XOR-Retrieve, XTREME-UP, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports MTEB Task Mean.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill embeddinggemma-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Embeddinggemma Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-embeddinggemma-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: embeddinggemma-eval
description: Evaluates the quality of text embeddings across diverse tasks including retrieval, classification, clustering, and semantic similarity. It probes multilingual, cross-lingual, and code understanding capabilities, measuring how well dense vector representations capture semantic relationships for downstream applications. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MTEB (Massive Text Embedding Benchmark), XOR-Retrieve, XTREME-UP, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports MTEB Task Mean.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2509.20354
bibtex_key: vera2025embeddinggemma
confidence: high
---
# embeddinggemma-eval
> EmbeddingGemma: Powerful and Lightweight Text Representations — Henrique Schechter Vera et al. (2025) (arXiv:2509.20354, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the quality of text embeddings across diverse tasks including retrieval, classification, clustering, and semantic similarity. It probes multilingual, cross-lingual, and code understanding capabilities, measuring how well dense vector representations capture semantic relationships for downstream applications.
## Datasets
- **MTEB (Massive Text Embedding Benchmark)** — total 162; splits: test (-1)
- **XOR-Retrieve** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **XTREME-UP** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `MTEB Task Mean` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Average of normalized scores across all individual MTEB tasks. Scores are typically normalized to [0, 1] per task before averaging.
- `MTEB Type Mean` — range: [0, 1]
- Average of normalized scores grouped by task type (e.g., Retrieval, Classification, Clustering, STS).
- `Borda rank` — range: rank
- Ranking metric computed by assigning points based on task-level performance across all models, then summing to produce an aggregate rank.
- `Recall@5kt` — range: [0, 1]
- Fraction of queries where the correct passage is retrieved within the top 5,000 candidates.
- `MRR@10` — range: [0, 1]
- Mean Reciprocal Rank at 10, averaging the inverse rank of the first correct passage across queries.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Text pairs (query, passage) or single documents, formatted with task-specific prompt instructions from the model card. Context length is typically 512 tokens, extended to 1024 or 2048 for long-context tasks.
**Output**: Dense embedding vectors, defaulting to 768 dimensions but also evaluated at 512, 256, and 128 dimensions.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_mteb_scores(predictions, gold, task_type):
if task_type in ['retrieval', 'reranking']:
return compute_ranking_metrics(predictions, gold, k=10)
elif task_type in ['classification', 'multilabel']:
return compute_accuracy(predictions, gold)
elif task_type == 'clustering':
return compute_clustering_score(predictions, gold)
elif task_type == 'sts':
return pearson_spearson_correlation(predictions, gold)
return normalized_score
def aggregate_scores(task_scores):
task_mean = mean(task_scores)
type_mean = mean(group_by_type(task_scores))
return task_mean, type_mean
```
## Common pitfalls
- Models trained on more than 25% of the MTEB data are excluded to mitigate potential overfitting; failing to check training data composition can lead to invalid comparisons.
- Prompt instructions must strictly follow the model card; using default or mismatched prompts significantly degrades performance.
- Context length varies by task (512 vs 1024/2048); using a fixed context length across all tasks may underperform on long-context benchmarks.
- Embedding dimensionality heavily impacts scores; comparing 768d results directly with 128d results without noting the trade-off is misleading.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We also show results on XOR-Retrieve and XTREME-UP, reporting Recall@5kt and MRR@10 respectively. EmbeddingGemma achieves the #1 rank and highest overall performance on the MTEB multilingual, English, and code leaderboards across models under 500M parameters, with a significant lead over all previous top performing models on each of the metrics summarizing aggregate performance across tasks (Task Mean, Task Type Mean, and Borda rank).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{vera2025embeddinggemma,
title={EmbeddingGemma: Powerful and Lightweight Text Representations},
author={Henrique Schechter Vera et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2509.20354}
}
```
- arXiv: 2509.20354
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!