Skip to content
Back to skills

Gscan Eval

ASecurity

Evaluates systematic generalization in grounded language understanding by testing whether models can interpret natural language commands within dynamic grid-world environments. It probes compositional generalization across novel object properties, navigation directions, contextual size references, action-argument bindings, and adverbial modifiers. Use when the user wants to benchmark on gSCAN, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports exact match accuracy.

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

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

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

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Gscan Eval?

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

Security grade badge for Gscan Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-gscan-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-gscan-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: gscan-eval
description: Evaluates systematic generalization in grounded language understanding by testing whether models can interpret natural language commands within dynamic grid-world environments. It probes compositional generalization across novel object properties, navigation directions, contextual size references, action-argument bindings, and adverbial modifiers. Use when the user wants to benchmark on gSCAN, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports exact match accuracy.
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2003.05161
  bibtex_key: ruis2020gscan
  confidence: high
---

# gscan-eval

> A Benchmark for Systematic Generalization in Grounded Language Understanding — Ruis et al. (2020) (arXiv:2003.05161, 2020)

## What this evaluates

Evaluates systematic generalization in grounded language understanding by testing whether models can interpret natural language commands within dynamic grid-world environments. It probes compositional generalization across novel object properties, navigation directions, contextual size references, action-argument bindings, and adverbial modifiers.

## Datasets

- **gSCAN** — total ?; splits: random (19282), novel-object-properties-red (-1), novel-object-properties-yellow (-1), novel-direction (-1), novel-contextual-references (-1), novel-action-arguments (-1), novel-adverbs-fewshot (-1), novel-adverbs-combination (-1); repo https://github.com/LauraRuis/groundedSCAN

## Metrics

- `exact match accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
  - Calculated as the percentage of test examples where the model's predicted action sequence exactly matches the gold action sequence. Partial matches or step-wise correctness do not receive credit.

## Input / output format

**Input**: A natural language instruction (e.g., 'walk to the small red circle') paired with a dynamic grid-world visual state containing objects of varying colors, shapes, and sizes at specific coordinates.

**Output**: A sequence of discrete navigation/interaction actions (e.g., walk, L_turn, R_turn, stay, push, pull) that moves the agent from its starting position to the target object and performs the required interaction.

## Scoring recipe

```python
def compute_exact_match(predictions, golds):
    correct = 0
    for pred, gold in zip(predictions, golds):
        if pred == gold:
            correct += 1
    return (correct / len(golds)) * 100
```

## Common pitfalls

- Exact match requires the entire action sequence to be identical; step-wise accuracy or partial path completion is not counted as correct.
- Splits are grounded in specific world-state configurations (e.g., relative size, object weight, spatial direction), not just linguistic variations, so models cannot rely on purely syntactic generalization.
- The benchmark uses synthetic grid-world environments, so performance does not directly transfer to real-world robotics or complex visual grounding tasks without adaptation.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> The baseline model achieves near perfect exact match accuracy ($97.69\%\pm 0.22$ mean over 3 runs, reported with standard deviation) on the 19,282 test examples, where exact match means that the entire action sequence is produced correctly.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{ruis2020gscan,
  title={A Benchmark for Systematic Generalization in Grounded Language Understanding},
  author={Ruis et al. (2020)},
  year={2020},
  note={arXiv:2003.05161}
}
```

- arXiv: 2003.05161

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.