AGENT SKILL

evaluation-lm-evaluation-harness

Evaluates LLMs across 60+ academic benchmarks (MMLU, HumanEval, GSM8K, TruthfulQA, HellaSwag). Use when benchmarking model quality, comparing models, reporting academic results, or tracking training progress. Industry standard used by EleutherAI, HuggingFace, and major labs. Supports HuggingFace, vLLM, APIs.

License 许可
MIT
最近更新
2026-11-14
Stars
★ 3.3w
Forks
3.9k

01 前言 Front Matter

name
evaluation-lm-evaluation-harness
license
MIT
metadata
{ "tags": [ "Evaluation", "LM Evaluation Harness", "Benchmarking", "MMLU", "HumanEval", "GSM8K", "EleutherAI", "Model Quality", "Academic Benchmarks", "Industry Standard" ], "author": "Orchestra Research", "version": "1.0.0", "dependencies": [ "lm-eval", "transformers", "vllm" ] }
description
Evaluates LLMs across 60+ academic benchmarks (MMLU, HumanEval, GSM8K, TruthfulQA, HellaSwag). Use when benchmarking model quality, comparing models, reporting academic results, or tracking training progress. Industry standard used by EleutherAI, HuggingFace, and major labs. Supports HuggingFace, vLLM, APIs.

02 资源文件 10

03 SKILL.md 正文

lm-evaluation-harness - LLM Benchmarking

Quick start

lm-evaluation-harness evaluates LLMs across 60+ academic benchmarks using standardized prompts and metrics.

Installation:

pip install lm-eval

Evaluate any HuggingFace model:

lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf \
  --tasks mmlu,gsm8k,hellaswag \
  --device cuda:0 \
  --batch_size 8

View available tasks:

lm_eval --tasks list

Common workflows

Workflow 1: Standard benchmark evaluation

Evaluate model on core benchmarks (MMLU, GSM8K, HumanEval).

Copy this checklist:

Benchmark Evaluation:
- [ ] Step 1: Choose benchmark suite
- [ ] Step 2: Configure model
- [ ] Step 3: Run evaluation
- [ ] Step 4: Analyze results

Step 1: Choose benchmark suite

Core reasoning benchmarks:

  • MMLU (Massive Multitask Language Understanding) - 57 subjects, multiple choice
  • GSM8K - Grade school math word problems
  • HellaSwag - Common sense reasoning
  • TruthfulQA - Truthfulness and factuality
  • ARC (AI2 Reasoning Challenge) - Science questions

Code benchmarks:

  • HumanEval - Python code generation (164 problems)
  • MBPP (Mostly Basic Python Problems) - Python coding

Standard suite (recommended for model releases):

--tasks mmlu,gsm8k,hellaswag,truthfulqa,arc_challenge

Step 2: Configure model

HuggingFace model:

lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf,dtype=bfloat16 \
  --tasks mmlu \
  --device cuda:0 \
  --batch_size auto  # Auto-detect optimal batch size

Quantized model (4-bit/8-bit):

lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf,load_in_4bit=True \
  --tasks mmlu \
  --device cuda:0

Custom checkpoint:

lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=/path/to/my-model,tokenizer=/path/to/tokenizer \
  --tasks mmlu \
  --device cuda:0

Step 3: Run evaluation

# Full MMLU evaluation (57 subjects)
lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf \
  --tasks mmlu \
  --num_fewshot 5 \  # 5-shot evaluation (standard)
  --batch_size 8 \
  --output_path results/ \
  --log_samples  # Save individual predictions

# Multiple benchmarks at once
lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf \
  --tasks mmlu,gsm8k,hellaswag,truthfulqa,arc_challenge \
  --num_fewshot 5 \
  --batch_size 8 \
  --output_path results/llama2-7b-eval.json

Step 4: Analyze results

Results saved to results/llama2-7b-eval.json:

{
  "results": {
    "mmlu": {
      "acc": 0.459,
      "acc_stderr": 0.004
    },
    "gsm8k": {
      "exact_match": 0.142,
      "exact_match_stderr": 0.006
    },
    "hellaswag": {
      "acc_norm": 0.765,
      "acc_norm_stderr": 0.004
    }
  },
  "config": {
    "model": "hf",
    "model_args": "pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf",
    "num_fewshot": 5
  }
}

Workflow 2: Track training progress

Evaluate checkpoints during training.

Training Progress Tracking:
- [ ] Step 1: Set up periodic evaluation
- [ ] Step 2: Choose quick benchmarks
- [ ] Step 3: Automate evaluation
- [ ] Step 4: Plot learning curves

Step 1: Set up periodic evaluation

Evaluate every N training steps:

#!/bin/bash
# eval_checkpoint.sh

CHECKPOINT_DIR=$1
STEP=$2

lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=$CHECKPOINT_DIR/checkpoint-$STEP \
  --tasks gsm8k,hellaswag \
  --num_fewshot 0 \  # 0-shot for speed
  --batch_size 16 \
  --output_path results/step-$STEP.json

Step 2: Choose quick benchmarks

Fast benchmarks for frequent evaluation:

  • HellaSwag: ~10 minutes on 1 GPU
  • GSM8K: ~5 minutes
  • PIQA: ~2 minutes

Avoid for frequent eval (too slow):

  • MMLU: ~2 hours (57 subjects)
  • HumanEval: Requires code execution

Step 3: Automate evaluation

Integrate with training script:

# In training loop
if step % eval_interval == 0:
    model.save_pretrained(f"checkpoints/step-{step}")

    # Run evaluation
    os.system(f"./eval_checkpoint.sh checkpoints step-{step}")

Or use PyTorch Lightning callbacks:

from pytorch_lightning import Callback

class EvalHarnessCallback(Callback):
    def on_validation_epoch_end(self, trainer, pl_module):
        step = trainer.global_step
        checkpoint_path = f"checkpoints/step-{step}"

        # Save checkpoint
        trainer.save_checkpoint(checkpoint_path)

        # Run lm-eval
        os.system(f"lm_eval --model hf --model_args pretrained={checkpoint_path} ...")

Step 4: Plot learning curves

import json
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

# Load all results
steps = []
mmlu_scores = []

for file in sorted(glob.glob("results/step-*.json")):
    with open(file) as f:
        data = json.load(f)
        step = int(file.split("-")[1].split(".")[0])
        steps.append(step)
        mmlu_scores.append(data["results"]["mmlu"]["acc"])

# Plot
plt.plot(steps, mmlu_scores)
plt.xlabel("Training Step")
plt.ylabel("MMLU Accuracy")
plt.title("Training Progress")
plt.savefig("training_curve.png")

Workflow 3: Compare multiple models

Benchmark suite for model comparison.

Model Comparison:
- [ ] Step 1: Define model list
- [ ] Step 2: Run evaluations
- [ ] Step 3: Generate comparison table

Step 1: Define model list

# models.txt
meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf
meta-llama/Llama-2-13b-hf
mistralai/Mistral-7B-v0.1
microsoft/phi-2

Step 2: Run evaluations

#!/bin/bash
# eval_all_models.sh

TASKS="mmlu,gsm8k,hellaswag,truthfulqa"

while read model; do
    echo "Evaluating $model"

    # Extract model name for output file
    model_name=$(echo $model | sed 's/\//-/g')

    lm_eval --model hf \
      --model_args pretrained=$model,dtype=bfloat16 \
      --tasks $TASKS \
      --num_fewshot 5 \
      --batch_size auto \
      --output_path results/$model_name.json

done < models.txt

Step 3: Generate comparison table

import json
import pandas as pd

models = [
    "meta-llama-Llama-2-7b-hf",
    "meta-llama-Llama-2-13b-hf",
    "mistralai-Mistral-7B-v0.1",
    "microsoft-phi-2"
]

tasks = ["mmlu", "gsm8k", "hellaswag", "truthfulqa"]

results = []
for model in models:
    with open(f"results/{model}.json") as f:
        data = json.load(f)
        row = {"Model": model.replace("-", "/")}
        for task in tasks:
            # Get primary metric for each task
            metrics = data["results"][task]
            if "acc" in metrics:
                row[task.upper()] = f"{metrics['acc']:.3f}"
            elif "exact_match" in metrics:
                row[task.upper()] = f"{metrics['exact_match']:.3f}"
        results.append(row)

df = pd.DataFrame(results)
print(df.to_markdown(index=False))

Output:

| Model                  | MMLU  | GSM8K | HELLASWAG | TRUTHFULQA |
|------------------------|-------|-------|-----------|------------|
| meta-llama/Llama-2-7b  | 0.459 | 0.142 | 0.765     | 0.391      |
| meta-llama/Llama-2-13b | 0.549 | 0.287 | 0.801     | 0.430      |
| mistralai/Mistral-7B   | 0.626 | 0.395 | 0.812     | 0.428      |
| microsoft/phi-2        | 0.560 | 0.613 | 0.682     | 0.447      |

Workflow 4: Evaluate with vLLM (faster inference)

Use vLLM backend for 5-10x faster evaluation.

vLLM Evaluation:
- [ ] Step 1: Install vLLM
- [ ] Step 2: Configure vLLM backend
- [ ] Step 3: Run evaluation

Step 1: Install vLLM

pip install vllm

Step 2: Configure vLLM backend

lm_eval --model vllm \
  --model_args pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf,tensor_parallel_size=1,dtype=auto,gpu_memory_utilization=0.8 \
  --tasks mmlu \
  --batch_size auto

Step 3: Run evaluation

vLLM is 5-10× faster than standard HuggingFace:

# Standard HF: ~2 hours for MMLU on 7B model
lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf \
  --tasks mmlu \
  --batch_size 8

# vLLM: ~15-20 minutes for MMLU on 7B model
lm_eval --model vllm \
  --model_args pretrained=meta-llama/Llama-2-7b-hf,tensor_parallel_size=2 \
  --tasks mmlu \
  --batch_size auto

When to use vs alternatives

Use lm-evaluation-harness when:

  • Benchmarking models for academic papers
  • Comparing model quality across standard tasks
  • Tracking training progress
  • Reporting standardized metrics (everyone uses same prompts)
  • Need reproducible evaluation

Use alternatives instead:

  • HELM (Stanford): Broader evaluation (fairness, efficiency, calibration)
  • AlpacaEval: Instruction-following evaluation with LLM judges
  • MT-Bench: Conversational multi-turn evaluation
  • Custom scripts: Domain-specific evaluation

Common issues

Issue: Evaluation too slow

Use vLLM backend:

lm_eval --model vllm \
  --model_args pretrained=model-name,tensor_parallel_size=2

Or reduce fewshot examples:

--num_fewshot 0  # Instead of 5

Or evaluate subset of MMLU:

--tasks mmlu_stem  # Only STEM subjects

Issue: Out of memory

Reduce batch size:

--batch_size 1  # Or --batch_size auto

Use quantization:

--model_args pretrained=model-name,load_in_8bit=True

Enable CPU offloading:

--model_args pretrained=model-name,device_map=auto,offload_folder=offload

Issue: Different results than reported

Check fewshot count:

--num_fewshot 5  # Most papers use 5-shot

Check exact task name:

--tasks mmlu  # Not mmlu_direct or mmlu_fewshot

Verify model and tokenizer match:

--model_args pretrained=model-name,tokenizer=same-model-name

Issue: HumanEval not executing code

Install execution dependencies:

pip install human-eval

Enable code execution:

lm_eval --model hf \
  --model_args pretrained=model-name \
  --tasks humaneval \
  --allow_code_execution  # Required for HumanEval

Advanced topics

Benchmark descriptions: See references/benchmark-guide.md for detailed description of all 60+ tasks, what they measure, and interpretation.

Custom tasks: See references/custom-tasks.md for creating domain-specific evaluation tasks.

API evaluation: See references/api-evaluation.md for evaluating OpenAI, Anthropic, and other API models.

Multi-GPU strategies: See references/distributed-eval.md for data parallel and tensor parallel evaluation.

Hardware requirements

  • GPU: NVIDIA (CUDA 11.8+), works on CPU (very slow)
  • VRAM:
    • 7B model: 16GB (bf16) or 8GB (8-bit)
    • 13B model: 28GB (bf16) or 14GB (8-bit)
    • 70B model: Requires multi-GPU or quantization
  • Time (7B model, single A100):
    • HellaSwag: 10 minutes
    • GSM8K: 5 minutes
    • MMLU (full): 2 hours
    • HumanEval: 20 minutes

Resources

04 同仓库更多 Skills

davila7
davila7/claude-code-templates

wealthville-pool-scoring

Score DeFi liquidity pools before providing liquidity. Returns a 0-100 pool score and an Enter/Hold/Exit/Reduce/Avoid verdict with calibrated confidence for ~68,800 Solana pools and 575 EVM pools, plus a public miss-inclusive track record. Use when asked whether a pool is worth LPing into, which pools look best right now, or how accurate the scores have actually been.

Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.3w
davila7
davila7/claude-code-templates

technical-debt-auditor

Scans a codebase and produces a quantified technical debt report with a prioritized remediation plan. Analyzes dead code, TODO/FIXME/HACK markers, dependency staleness, complexity hotspots, code duplication signals, test coverage gaps, unused exports, and outdated patterns. Use this skill when the user asks to audit their codebase for tech debt, wants a health check of their code quality, says things like "where should I focus refactoring", "find code smells", "audit my codebase", "what technical debt do we have", "prioritize cleanup work", or asks about code quality metrics. Also trigger when the user mentions "code rot", "legacy cleanup", "refactoring priorities", or wants to understand the overall health of a project before a major effort. Trigger even if the user doesn't say "technical debt" explicitly — any request to systematically assess code quality and identify improvement priorities belongs here.

Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.3w
davila7
davila7/claude-code-templates

readonly-sql-guard

Make an agent's database access provably read-only. Use when an agent runs caller-supplied SQL against a production/ERP/analytics database (a "query" MCP tool, text-to-SQL, an admin console), or when reviewing DB-access code for write/DDL/side-effect/transaction-escape risks. Checks what a statement CALLS, not just its shape.

数据分析师后端与接口Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.3w
davila7
davila7/claude-code-templates

web-artifacts-builder

Suite of tools for creating elaborate, multi-component claude.ai HTML artifacts using modern frontend web technologies (React, Tailwind CSS, shadcn/ui). Use for complex artifacts requiring state management, routing, or shadcn/ui components - not for simple single-file HTML/JSX artifacts.

前端开发
★ 3.3w
davila7
davila7/claude-code-templates

webapp-testing

Toolkit for interacting with and testing local web applications using Playwright. Supports verifying frontend functionality, debugging UI behavior, capturing browser screenshots, and viewing browser logs.

测试与质量前端开发
★ 3.3w
davila7
davila7/claude-code-templates

discernment-nudge

After you give a substantive answer or draft that the user may act on — advice or recommendations, drafted artifacts such as goals, plans, pitches, proposals, or emails, estimates or projections, analysis or interpretation of data, factual claims they may rely on, or a multi-step argument — invoke this skill BEFORE finalizing your reply and then, if it applies, append 2-3 short follow-up questions, each tied to something specific in what you just produced, that help the user check key facts, probe the reasoning or assumptions, and notice missing context. Do this at most once per conversation. Skip it when the user asked a trivial how-to or simple lookup, wants a purely educational explanation, asked you only to format, convert, or assemble a file from content they provided, is writing code they will run, is doing creative writing or casual chat, or already asked you to double-check, cite, or review — the skill file explains these boundaries and the exact output format.

内容创作者写作与文案Skill与智能体开发
★ 3.3w