Skip to content
Back to skills

Patent Ce Eval

ASecurity

This benchmark evaluates the quality of generated patent claims against expert-annotated reference claims across five dimensions: feature completeness, conceptual clarity, terminology consistency, logical linkage, and overall quality. It probes a model's ability to capture patent-specific linguistic precision, legal formality, and structural requirements rather than just surface-level text overlap. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Patent-CE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports ...

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

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

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

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Patent Ce Eval?

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

Security grade badge for Patent Ce Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-patent-ce-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-patent-ce-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: patent-ce-eval
description: This benchmark evaluates the quality of generated patent claims against expert-annotated reference claims across five dimensions: feature completeness, conceptual clarity, terminology consistency, logical linkage, and overall quality. It probes a model's ability to capture patent-specific linguistic precision, legal formality, and structural requirements rather than just surface-level text overlap. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Patent-CE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Kendall-Tau correlation.
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2505.11095
  bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
  confidence: high
---

# patent-ce-eval

> Towards Better Evaluation for Generated Patent Claims — Jiang et al. (2025) (arXiv:2505.11095, 2025)

## What this evaluates

This benchmark evaluates the quality of generated patent claims against expert-annotated reference claims across five dimensions: feature completeness, conceptual clarity, terminology consistency, logical linkage, and overall quality. It probes a model's ability to capture patent-specific linguistic precision, legal formality, and structural requirements rather than just surface-level text overlap.

## Datasets

- **Patent-CE** — total 1228; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/scylj1/PatClaimEval

## Metrics

- `Kendall-Tau correlation` **(primary)** — range: [-1, 1]
  - Measures the number of concordant and discordant pairs between two ranked lists to assess rank correlation. Values range from -1 (perfect disagreement) to 1 (perfect agreement).
- `Spearman correlation` — range: [-1, 1]
  - Computes the Pearson correlation between the rank variables of two lists. It is more sensitive to large rank differences than Kendall-Tau.
- `accuracy` — range: [0, 1]
  - Proportion of correctly predicted classification labels in the three-way classification setup.
- `F1 score` — range: [0, 1]
  - Harmonic mean of precision and recall for the three-way classification task.

## Input / output format

**Input**: A pair of texts: a reference patent claim and a candidate (generated) patent claim.

**Output**: A quality score or rank for the candidate claim, or a three-way classification label (e.g., acceptable/unacceptable/conditional), depending on the metric being evaluated.

## Scoring recipe

```python
def compute_kendall_tau(predictions, gold):
    concordant = discordant = tied = 0
    for i in range(len(predictions)):
        for j in range(i + 1, len(predictions)):
            diff_p = predictions[i] - predictions[j]
            diff_g = gold[i] - gold[j]
            if diff_p * diff_g > 0: concordant += 1
            elif diff_p * diff_g < 0: discordant += 1
            else: tied += 1
    tau = (concordant - discordant) / (concordant + discordant + tied)
    return tau
```

## Common pitfalls

- The dataset explicitly lacks source texts/context, so metrics requiring context (like AlignScore or UniEval) cannot be applied as intended.
- For classification tasks, score differences below 10^-4 are treated as equivalent labels, which can artificially inflate accuracy/F1 if not handled.
- Evaluating patent claims requires multi-dimensional assessment (completeness, clarity, consistency, linkage, quality) rather than relying solely on n-gram overlap or single scalar scores.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> We used the Kendall-Tau correlation to assess the overall alignment with human judgment, following the approach of previous work by Zuo et al. ([2024]). This correlation metric evaluates the consistency of the global ranking while disregarding minor errors in individual predictions. We additionally report the Spearman correlation. Compared to Kendall-Tau, Spearman is more sensitive to large rank differences, providing a complementary perspective on the metric ability to predict relative claim quality.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{jiang2025patentce,
  title={Towards Better Evaluation for Generated Patent Claims},
  author={Jiang et al. (2025)},
  year={2025},
  note={arXiv:2505.11095}
}
```

- arXiv: 2505.11095

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.