stindardlogic commited on
Commit
f18af03
·
verified ·
1 Parent(s): beb7c62

Add dataset card

Browse files
Files changed (1) hide show
  1. README.md +67 -0
README.md ADDED
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1
+ ---
2
+ language:
3
+ - en
4
+ license: apache-2.0
5
+ size_categories:
6
+ - 100K<n<1M
7
+ task_categories:
8
+ - text-generation
9
+ - question-answering
10
+ tags:
11
+ - llm-evaluation
12
+ - benchmarking
13
+ - ai-safety
14
+ - sft
15
+ - synthetic
16
+ - prompt-engineering
17
+ - rlhf
18
+ - hallucination
19
+ - model-comparison
20
+ pretty_name: LLM Evaluation SFT 100K
21
+ ---
22
+
23
+ # LLM Evaluation SFT 100K
24
+
25
+ A synthetic supervised fine-tuning dataset of 100,000 high-quality conversations covering LLM evaluation methodology, benchmarking, safety assessment, and prompt optimization. Designed to train AI assistants that can help ML engineers and researchers rigorously evaluate and improve language models.
26
+
27
+ ## Dataset Description
28
+
29
+ This dataset covers the full spectrum of LLM evaluation practice across 7 specialized categories. Each record follows the ShareGPT format with a practitioner-level question and a detailed, methodology-rich response including working code examples.
30
+
31
+ ## Categories
32
+
33
+ | Category | Description |
34
+ |---|---|
35
+ | `benchmark_design` | Designing reliable, contamination-free benchmarks |
36
+ | `model_comparison` | Systematic model comparison, consistency measurement |
37
+ | `hallucination_detection` | Measuring and reducing hallucinations in RAG systems |
38
+ | `eval_frameworks` | LM Eval Harness, RAGAS, DeepEval, LangSmith comparison |
39
+ | `prompt_optimization` | Systematic prompt engineering with statistical testing |
40
+ | `safety_evaluation` | Red-teaming, bias testing, deployment safety gates |
41
+ | `finetuning_evaluation` | Fine-tuned vs base model comparison, catastrophic forgetting |
42
+
43
+ ## Format
44
+
45
+ ShareGPT format:
46
+ ```json
47
+ {
48
+ "conversations": [
49
+ {"from": "human", "value": "...evaluation question..."},
50
+ {"from": "gpt", "value": "...methodology-rich response with code..."}
51
+ ],
52
+ "metadata": {"category": "...", "context": "..."},
53
+ "id": "uuid"
54
+ }
55
+ ```
56
+
57
+ ## Use Cases
58
+
59
+ - Fine-tuning AI assistants for ML evaluation tasks
60
+ - Training models to reason about benchmark methodology
61
+ - Building AI-assisted evaluation pipelines
62
+ - Educating teams on LLM quality measurement
63
+ - Safety evaluation tooling and red-teaming assistance
64
+
65
+ ## Quality Notes
66
+
67
+ All responses include working Python code examples using popular evaluation frameworks (lm-eval, RAGAS, DeepEval, LangSmith), statistical testing methods, and production-ready evaluation patterns.