Assesses practical financial application capabilities across a hierarchical framework of 10 primary and 21 secondary scenarios. It probes models' ability to perform real-world financial tasks such as compliance checking, document generation, risk control, data extraction, and client analysis. Use when the user wants to benchmark on FLAME-Sce, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports usability rate.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Flame Sce Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-flame-sce-eval)
---
name: flame-sce-eval
description: Assesses practical financial application capabilities across a hierarchical framework of 10 primary and 21 secondary scenarios. It probes models' ability to perform real-world financial tasks such as compliance checking, document generation, risk control, data extraction, and client analysis. Use when the user wants to benchmark on FLAME-Sce, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports usability rate.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2501.06211
bibtex_key: guo2025flame
confidence: high
---
# flame-sce-eval
> FLAME: Financial Large-Language Model Assessment and Metrics Evaluation — Guo et al. (2025) (arXiv:2501.06211, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Assesses practical financial application capabilities across a hierarchical framework of 10 primary and 21 secondary scenarios. It probes models' ability to perform real-world financial tasks such as compliance checking, document generation, risk control, data extraction, and client analysis.
## Datasets
- **FLAME-Sce** — total ?; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/FLAME-ruc/FLAME
## Metrics
- `usability rate` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of tasks completed successfully according to predefined format and content rules. Calculated as (number of successfully evaluated tasks / total tasks) * 100.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Task-specific prompt containing instructions, context (e.g., financial reports, customer profiles, transaction records), and strict output formatting requirements.
**Output**: Varies by scenario: structured text, JSON, classification labels, or specific formatted responses (e.g., '我的结论是:[result]').
## Scoring recipe
```python
success_count = 0
for pred, gold in zip(predictions, gold_labels):
if check_format(pred, gold['format']) and check_content(pred, gold['answer']):
success_count += 1
usability_rate = (success_count / len(predictions)) * 100
return usability_rate
```
## Common pitfalls
- Strict output formatting is enforced; deviating from the requested structure (e.g., JSON, specific prefixes) results in automatic failure.
- Open-ended scenarios (e.g., marketing, analysis) require balancing creativity with strict financial compliance and length constraints.
- Models often fail to correctly parse or extract data from OCR/text-heavy financial documents.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Overall, Baichuan4-Finance leads with a usability rate of 84.15%. GPT-4o and Qwen2.5-72B-Instruct exhibit similar performance levels, around 79%.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{guo2025flame,
title={FLAME: Financial Large-Language Model Assessment and Metrics Evaluation},
author={Guo et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2501.06211}
}
```
- arXiv: 2501.06211