Evaluates lifelong language models' ability to update outdated world knowledge while retaining new information and avoiding catastrophic forgetting. It specifically probes temporal adaptation, numerical reasoning, and the model's capacity to forget obsolete facts during continual pretraining. Use when the user wants to benchmark on EvolvingQA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Exact Match (EM).
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill evolvingqa-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Evolvingqa Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-evolvingqa-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: evolvingqa-eval
description: Evaluates lifelong language models' ability to update outdated world knowledge while retaining new information and avoiding catastrophic forgetting. It specifically probes temporal adaptation, numerical reasoning, and the model's capacity to forget obsolete facts during continual pretraining. Use when the user wants to benchmark on EvolvingQA, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Exact Match (EM).
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2311.08106
bibtex_key: kim2023carpediem
confidence: high
---
# evolvingqa-eval
> Carpe Diem: On the Evaluation of World Knowledge in Lifelong Language Models — Kim et al. (2023) (arXiv:2311.08106, 2023)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates lifelong language models' ability to update outdated world knowledge while retaining new information and avoiding catastrophic forgetting. It specifically probes temporal adaptation, numerical reasoning, and the model's capacity to forget obsolete facts during continual pretraining.
## Datasets
- **EvolvingQA** — total ?; splits: Unchanged (-1), New (-1), Outdated (-1), Updated (-1); repo https://github.com/kimyuji/EvolvingQA_benchmark
## Metrics
- `Exact Match (EM)` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- 1 if the predicted answer exactly matches the ground truth answer, else 0.
- `F1 score` — range: [0, 1]
- Calculated by counting the common tokens between the predicted answer and the ground truth answer, averaged over the dataset.
## Input / output format
**Input**: A question about world knowledge, typically presented as an open-book QA prompt. During pretraining, entities are masked, but evaluation uses standard question format.
**Output**: A predicted answer string.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(predictions, golds):
em_scores = [1.0 if p.strip() == g.strip() else 0.0 for p, g in zip(predictions, golds)]
f1_scores = []
for p, g in zip(predictions, golds):
p_tokens = p.lower().split()
g_tokens = g.lower().split()
common = len(set(p_tokens) & set(g_tokens))
f1 = 2 * common / (len(p_tokens) + len(g_tokens)) if (len(p_tokens) + len(g_tokens)) > 0 else 0.0
f1_scores.append(f1)
return {'EM': sum(em_scores) / len(em_scores), 'F1': sum(f1_scores) / len(f1_scores)}
```
## Common pitfalls
- Models often fail to forget outdated knowledge, yielding similar EM/F1 scores for 'Outdated' and 'Updated' questions instead of near-zero for outdated.
- Numerical and temporal answers consistently show near-zero EM scores because updated knowledge produces negligible weight gradients during continual pretraining.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We measure Exact Match(EM) and F1 score, and F1 score is calculated by counting the common tokens between predicted answer and ground truth answer.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{kim2023carpediem,
title={Carpe Diem: On the Evaluation of World Knowledge in Lifelong Language Models},
author={Kim et al. (2023)},
year={2023},
note={arXiv:2311.08106}
}
```
- arXiv: 2311.08106
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!