Skip to content
Back to skills

Forge Sid Eval

ASecurity

Evaluates the quality of generated Semantic Identifiers (SIDs) for generative retrieval in industrial recommendation and search systems. It measures how well SIDs capture item relationships and distribute usage fairly, and assesses their impact on downstream retrieval hitrate and online transaction metrics. Use when the user wants to benchmark on FORGE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports HR@K.

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

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill forge-sid-eval --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Forge Sid Eval?

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

Security grade badge for Forge Sid Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-forge-sid-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-forge-sid-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: forge-sid-eval
description: Evaluates the quality of generated Semantic Identifiers (SIDs) for generative retrieval in industrial recommendation and search systems. It measures how well SIDs capture item relationships and distribute usage fairly, and assesses their impact on downstream retrieval hitrate and online transaction metrics. Use when the user wants to benchmark on FORGE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports HR@K.
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2509.20904
  bibtex_key: fu2025forge
  confidence: high
---

# forge-sid-eval

> FORGE: Forming Semantic Identifiers for Generative Retrieval in Industrial Datasets — Fu et al. (2025) (arXiv:2509.20904, 2025)

## What this evaluates

Evaluates the quality of generated Semantic Identifiers (SIDs) for generative retrieval in industrial recommendation and search systems. It measures how well SIDs capture item relationships and distribute usage fairly, and assesses their impact on downstream retrieval hitrate and online transaction metrics.

## Datasets

- **FORGE** — total 250000000; splits: S1 (-1), S2 (-1), S3 (-1), val (-1); repo https://github.com/selous123/al_sid

## Metrics

- `HR@K` **(primary)** — range: percent
  - Hit Rate at K (K ∈ {20, 100, 500, 1000}). Calculated as the fraction of queries where the ground-truth item appears in the top-K retrieved items. Reported as a percentage in tables.
- `embedding hitrate` — range: [0, 1]
  - Measures the quality of item collaborative relationships within the multi-modal feature space by checking if relevant items appear in the top-K nearest neighbors of the query embedding.
- `Gini coefficient` — range: [0, 1]
  - Statistical measure of inequality in SID usage distribution across items. Lower values indicate a fairer, more balanced assignment of items to SIDs.

## Input / output format

**Input**: Multimodal item features (images, text, categories, sellers), item-to-item co-occurrence data, and user query/context. For SID generation, the model receives item features to produce discrete codebook tokens. For retrieval, it receives a query to predict SIDs and rank items.

**Output**: Discrete Semantic Identifiers (SIDs) structured as multi-level codebooks (e.g., 3×8192 or 2×32768 tokens per item). For retrieval tasks, the model outputs a ranked list of items or predicted SIDs.

## Scoring recipe

```python
def compute_hr_at_k(retrieved_list, ground_truth, k):
    return 1.0 if ground_truth in retrieved_list[:k] else 0.0

def compute_gini(values):
    sorted_vals = np.sort(values)
    n = len(sorted_vals)
    idx = np.arange(1, n + 1)
    return ((2 * np.sum(idx * sorted_vals)) / (n * np.sum(sorted_vals))) - ((n + 1) / n)

# Aggregate over dataset
total_hr = sum(compute_hr_at_k(preds[i], gold[i], k) for i in range(N)) / N
gini_val = compute_gini(sid_usage_counts)
```

## Common pitfalls

- Confusing offline proxy metrics (embedding hitrate, Gini) with online retrieval metrics (HR@K, PVR). The paper explicitly states these direct metrics can reliably proxy GR performance without full model training.
- Assuming SID collision strategies (KNN, Random, i2i) are universally optimal. Performance varies significantly across training stages (S1-S3) and codebook configurations (2-level vs 3-level).
- Misinterpreting HR@K values as raw counts rather than percentages. The paper reports all HR@K results as percentages (e.g., 3.61% for HR@20).

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> The direct evaluations of SIDs using embedding hitrate and Gini coefficient are presented in Figure 3. As we mentioned in Section 3.4, the embedding hitrate captures the quality of item collaborative relationships within the multi-modal feature $\mathcal{H}^{i}$, while the Gini coefficient reflects the fairness of SID distribution.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{fu2025forge,
  title={FORGE: Forming Semantic Identifiers for Generative Retrieval in Industrial Datasets},
  author={Fu et al. (2025)},
  year={2025},
  note={arXiv:2509.20904}
}
```

- arXiv: 2509.20904

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.