Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

RAFT: A Real-World Few-Shot Text Classification Benchmark

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2109.14076 v3 pith:7S7SQHZQ submitted 2021-09-28 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

RAFT: A Real-World Few-Shot Text Classification Benchmark

classification cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG
keywords tasksraftreal-worldclassificationfew-shothumanbaselinebenchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large pre-trained language models have shown promise for few-shot learning, completing text-based tasks given only a few task-specific examples. Will models soon solve classification tasks that have so far been reserved for human research assistants? Existing benchmarks are not designed to measure progress in applied settings, and so don't directly answer this question. The RAFT benchmark (Real-world Annotated Few-shot Tasks) focuses on naturally occurring tasks and uses an evaluation setup that mirrors deployment. Baseline evaluations on RAFT reveal areas current techniques struggle with: reasoning over long texts and tasks with many classes. Human baselines show that some classification tasks are difficult for non-expert humans, reflecting that real-world value sometimes depends on domain expertise. Yet even non-expert human baseline F1 scores exceed GPT-3 by an average of 0.11. The RAFT datasets and leaderboard will track which model improvements translate into real-world benefits at https://raft.elicit.org .

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. GAIA: a benchmark for General AI Assistants

    cs.CL 2023-11 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    GAIA benchmark shows humans at 92% accuracy on simple real-world questions far outperform current AI systems at 15%, proposing this gap as a key milestone for general AI.

  2. Evaluating Zero-Shot and One-Shot Adaptation of Small Language Models in Leader-Follower Interaction

    cs.HC 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0

    Fine-tuned Qwen2.5-0.5B classifies leader-follower roles with 86.66% accuracy in single-turn interactions, but accuracy falls to chance in one-shot multi-turn interactions.