Evaluates machine learning models' robustness to real-world distribution shifts, specifically domain generalization and subpopulation shifts. It measures how much model performance degrades when tested on out-of-distribution (OOD) data compared to in-distribution (ID) data, highlighting gaps in generalization for real-world deployment. Use when the user wants to benchmark on WILDS, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports ID and OOD performance.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill wilds-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Wilds Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-wilds-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: wilds-eval
description: Evaluates machine learning models' robustness to real-world distribution shifts, specifically domain generalization and subpopulation shifts. It measures how much model performance degrades when tested on out-of-distribution (OOD) data compared to in-distribution (ID) data, highlighting gaps in generalization for real-world deployment. Use when the user wants to benchmark on WILDS, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports ID and OOD performance.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2012.07421
bibtex_key: koh2020wilds
confidence: high
---
# wilds-eval
> WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts — Pang Wei Koh et al. (2020) (arXiv:2012.07421, 2020)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates machine learning models' robustness to real-world distribution shifts, specifically domain generalization and subpopulation shifts. It measures how much model performance degrades when tested on out-of-distribution (OOD) data compared to in-distribution (ID) data, highlighting gaps in generalization for real-world deployment.
## Datasets
- **WILDS** — total ?; splits: train (-1), val (-1), test (-1); repo https://github.com/p-lambda/wilds
## Metrics
- `ID and OOD performance` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Reports both in-distribution (ID) and out-of-distribution (OOD) performance, typically calculated as accuracy or error rate on the respective data splits.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Standardized dataset instances (e.g., medical images, satellite imagery, codebases) with ground-truth labels.
**Output**: Model predictions for the target task.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(predictions, gold, id_mask):
id_acc = (predictions[id_mask] == gold[id_mask]).mean()
ood_acc = (predictions[~id_mask] == gold[~id_mask]).mean()
return {'id_performance': id_acc, 'ood_performance': ood_acc}
```
## Common pitfalls
- Overfitting to the limited OOD test domains (e.g., single hospital in CAMELYON17-wILDS)
- Failing to report both ID and OOD performance separately
- Using external data or non-default architectures that confound algorithmic contributions
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> To better understand the extent to which any gains in OOD performance can be attributed to improved ID performance versus a model that is more robust to (i.e., less affected by) the distribution shift, we encourage model developers to report both ID and OOD performance numbers.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{koh2020wilds,
title={WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts},
author={Pang Wei Koh et al. (2020)},
year={2020},
note={arXiv:2012.07421}
}
```
- arXiv: 2012.07421
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!