Skip to content
Back to skills

Llmrec Eval

ASecurity

Benchmarks off-the-shelf large language models on five recommendation tasks: rating prediction, sequential recommendation, direct recommendation, explanation generation, and review summarization. It probes both accuracy-driven prediction capabilities and natural language generation for explainability, revealing gaps between objective metric scores and human-perceived quality in recommendation contexts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on LLMRec Benchmark (includes Beauty dataset), or asks...

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

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

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

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Llmrec Eval?

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

Security grade badge for Llmrec Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-llmrec-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-llmrec-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: llmrec-eval
description: Benchmarks off-the-shelf large language models on five recommendation tasks: rating prediction, sequential recommendation, direct recommendation, explanation generation, and review summarization. It probes both accuracy-driven prediction capabilities and natural language generation for explainability, revealing gaps between objective metric scores and human-perceived quality in recommendation contexts. Use when the user wants to benchmark on LLMRec Benchmark (includes Beauty dataset), or asks about evaluating this task. Reports HR@10.
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2308.12241
  bibtex_key: liu2023llmrec
  confidence: high
---

# llmrec-eval

> LLMRec: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Recommendation Task — Liu et al. (2023) (arXiv:2308.12241, 2023)

## What this evaluates

Benchmarks off-the-shelf large language models on five recommendation tasks: rating prediction, sequential recommendation, direct recommendation, explanation generation, and review summarization. It probes both accuracy-driven prediction capabilities and natural language generation for explainability, revealing gaps between objective metric scores and human-perceived quality in recommendation contexts.

## Datasets

- **LLMRec Benchmark (includes Beauty dataset)** — total ?; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/williamliujl/LLMRec

## Metrics

- `RMSE` — range: other
  - Root Mean Squared Error: sqrt(mean((y_true - y_pred)^2)).
- `MAE` — range: other
  - Mean Absolute Error: mean(|y_true - y_pred|).
- `HR@5` — range: [0, 1]
  - Hit Rate at K: fraction of test items appearing in the top-K predicted list.
- `NDCG@5` — range: [0, 1]
  - Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain at K: measures ranking quality with position-based discounting.
- `HR@10` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
  - Hit Rate at K: fraction of test items appearing in the top-K predicted list.
- `NDCG@10` — range: [0, 1]
  - Normalized Discounted Cumulative Gain at K: measures ranking quality with position-based discounting.
- `ROUGE1` — range: [0, 1]
  - Recall of unigram overlap between generated and reference text.
- `ROUGE2` — range: [0, 1]
  - Recall of bigram overlap between generated and reference text.
- `ROUGEL` — range: [0, 1]
  - Recall of longest common subsequence overlap between generated and reference text.

## Input / output format

**Input**: Textual prompts containing user/item context or interaction history, requesting a numerical rating, a ranked list of items, or a natural language explanation/summary.

**Output**: Numerical value (rating), comma-separated or list of item IDs/names, or free-form natural language text.

## Scoring recipe

```python
def score(preds, golds, K=10):
    rmse = np.sqrt(np.mean((np.array(preds) - np.array(golds))**2))
    mae = np.mean(np.abs(np.array(preds) - np.array(golds)))
    hr = sum(1 for p, g in zip(preds, golds) if g in p[:K]) / len(preds)
    ndcg = compute_ndcg_at_k(preds, golds, k=K)
    rouge = rouge_score(golds, preds, types=['rouge1', 'rouge2', 'rougeL'])
    return {'RMSE': rmse, 'MAE': mae, 'HR@K': hr, 'NDCG@K': ndcg, 'ROUGE': rouge}
```

## Common pitfalls

- Off-the-shelf LLMs lack item-specific exposure, causing poor accuracy in rating and sequential recommendation tasks.
- Models often fail to produce standard structured outputs following prompt requirements without supervised fine-tuning (SFT).
- Objective metrics like ROUGE/BLEU do not correlate well with human-perceived quality of generated explanations or summaries.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> In the context of explainability-based tasks, it is evident that off-the-shelf models are progressively closing the gap with trained models and, in some cases, superseding base-line algorithms based on certain metrics, as clearly demonstrated in Table 1 and Table 2. For instance, in review summarization task, ChatGPT achieves 4.7177, 0.6924, and 4.2557 on ROUGE1, ROUGE2, and ROUGEL metrics, respectively, exceeding the performance of T0 and GPT-2 trained on Beauty dataset.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{liu2023llmrec,
  title={LLMRec: Benchmarking Large Language Models on Recommendation Task},
  author={Liu et al. (2023)},
  year={2023},
  note={arXiv:2308.12241}
}
```

- arXiv: 2308.12241

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.