Evaluates the zero-shot generalization capability of autoregressive language models across multiple task aggregates. It measures how well models trained on raw web data perform on downstream tasks without any fine-tuning or prompt engineering. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Eleuther AI LM evaluation harness (zero-shot aggregates), or asks about evaluating this task. Reports zero-shot accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill refinedweb-zero-shot-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Refinedweb Zero Shot Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-refinedweb-zero-shot-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: refinedweb-zero-shot-eval
description: Evaluates the zero-shot generalization capability of autoregressive language models across multiple task aggregates. It measures how well models trained on raw web data perform on downstream tasks without any fine-tuning or prompt engineering. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Eleuther AI LM evaluation harness (zero-shot aggregates), or asks about evaluating this task. Reports zero-shot accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2306.01116
bibtex_key: penedo2023refinedweb
confidence: high
---
# refinedweb-zero-shot-eval
> The RefinedWeb Dataset for Falcon LLM: Outperforming Curated Corpora with Web Data, and Web Data Only — Penedo et al. (2023) (arXiv:2306.01116, 2023)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the zero-shot generalization capability of autoregressive language models across multiple task aggregates. It measures how well models trained on raw web data perform on downstream tasks without any fine-tuning or prompt engineering.
## Datasets
- **Eleuther AI LM evaluation harness (zero-shot aggregates)** — total ?; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/EleutherAI/lm-evaluation-harness
## Metrics
- `zero-shot accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Percentage of tasks where the model's generated completion exactly matches the ground-truth label or correct answer in a zero-shot setting. Averaged across task aggregates (small, core, main, ext).
## Input / output format
**Input**: Task description or prompt followed by the question, provided in a zero-shot format without in-context examples.
**Output**: Autoregressive text completion. Accuracy is determined by parsing the generated text and comparing it to the gold label.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_zero_shot_accuracy(predictions, gold_labels):
correct = 0
for pred, gold in zip(predictions, gold_labels):
if normalize_answer(pred) == normalize_answer(gold):
correct += 1
return (correct / len(gold_labels)) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- Perplexity or validation loss alone can be misleading and does not correlate well with end-task zero-shot performance.
- Comparing models trained/evaluated with different codebases, numerical precisions, or prompts introduces externalities that skew results.
- Filtering heuristics do not guarantee consistent improvements across different source datasets; they often require source-specific tuning.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We base our evaluation on the popular Eleuther AI evaluation harness (Gao et al., 2021), allowing us to evaluate across a wide range of tasks in the zero-shot setting. ... Average accuracy in zero-shot on the small-agg aggregate.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{penedo2023refinedweb,
title={The RefinedWeb Dataset for Falcon LLM: Outperforming Curated Corpora with Web Data, and Web Data Only},
author={Penedo et al. (2023)},
year={2023},
note={arXiv:2306.01116}
}
```
- arXiv: 2306.01116
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!