Evaluates models' capabilities in knowledge abstraction, concretization, and completion within entity-concept knowledge graphs. It specifically probes multi-hop reasoning through hierarchical relations and cross-view knowledge transfer between entities and concepts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on KACC, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Hits@10.
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Kacc Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-kacc-eval)
---
name: kacc-eval
description: Evaluates models' capabilities in knowledge abstraction, concretization, and completion within entity-concept knowledge graphs. It specifically probes multi-hop reasoning through hierarchical relations and cross-view knowledge transfer between entities and concepts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on KACC, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Hits@10.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2004.13631
bibtex_key: zhou2020kacc
confidence: high
---
# kacc-eval
> KACC: A Multi-task Benchmark for Knowledge Abstraction, Concretization and Completion — Zhou et al. (2020) (arXiv:2004.13631, 2020)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates models' capabilities in knowledge abstraction, concretization, and completion within entity-concept knowledge graphs. It specifically probes multi-hop reasoning through hierarchical relations and cross-view knowledge transfer between entities and concepts.
## Datasets
- **KACC** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1); repo https://github.com/thunlp/KACC
## Metrics
- `MRR` — range: [0, 1]
- Mean Reciprocal Rank: the average of 1/rank for the correct answer across all queries.
- `Hits@1` — range: [0, 1]
- The fraction of queries where the correct answer is ranked first in the candidate list.
- `Hits@10` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- The fraction of queries where the correct answer is ranked within the top 10 predictions. Used as the headline metric for the overall KACC score.
## Input / output format
**Input**: A knowledge triple with one missing element (head, relation, ?) or (?, relation, tail), drawn from entity-level or concept-level graphs, sometimes requiring multi-hop reasoning.
**Output**: A ranked list of candidate entities or a relevance score for each candidate in the knowledge graph.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_kacc_overall(predictions, golds, tasks):
valid_tasks = [t for t in tasks if t not in ['CGC-Single', 'EGC-Single']]
hits10_scores = []
for task in valid_tasks:
correct = sum(1 for pred, gold in zip(predictions[task], golds[task]) if gold in pred[:10])
hits10_scores.append(correct / len(predictions[task]))
return sum(hits10_scores) / len(hits10_scores)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Multi-hop tasks (MKA, MKC) cause drastic performance degradation (>0.51 drop in MRR) compared to single-hop tasks, indicating composition rules are hard to learn.
- Models often bias toward entity triples over concept triples due to data imbalance, leading to poor performance on concept-level completion (CGC-Joint).
- Joint training settings do not consistently outperform single-graph settings for concept graphs, contrary to entity graph results.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Similar to GLUE (Wang et al., 2019a), we average Hits@10 scores of each method on all tasks (except CGC-Single and EGC-Single) to get final scores. We also compute the average scores for knowledge abstraction (KA), knowledge concretization (KCon), and knowledge completion (KCom).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{zhou2020kacc,
title={KACC: A Multi-task Benchmark for Knowledge Abstraction, Concretization and Completion},
author={Zhou et al. (2020)},
year={2020},
note={arXiv:2004.13631}
}
```
- arXiv: 2004.13631