On the Gemma-2-9B backbone, CIGAsk reports higher F1 than deployable SGP and much higher ambiguous-query clarification with lower clear-query over-clarification, while its F1 remains below the gold-label SGP-Oracle upper bound.

On the Gemma-2-9B backbone, CIGAsk reports higher F1 than deployable SGP and much higher ambiguous-query clarification with lower clear-query over-clarification, while its F1 remains below the gold-label SGP-Oracle upper bound. · CiteArk

测量结果

已评估 0/10 项

获得支持 0有争议或冲突 0尚未评估 10

保留同一结论下的完整结果组。已有评估排在前面；单项判断不替代整组结论。展开行查看条件、来源与历次证据。

每行是一项测量，分别显示论文报告、最近可用实测和累计证据状态。
指标与条件	论文报告	最近可用实测	证据判断
method: SGP · status: externally reported · backbone: Gemma-2-9B	0.726 score (0-1)	—	尚未评估
method: SGP · status: externally reported · backbone: Gemma-2-9B	0.429 proportion	—	尚未评估
method: SGP · status: externally reported · backbone: Gemma-2-9B	0.206 proportion	—	尚未评估
method: SGP-Oracle · status: externally reported · backbone: Gemma-2-9B · usesGoldAmbiguityLabels: true	0.787 score (0-1)	—	尚未评估
method: SGP-Oracle · status: externally reported · backbone: Gemma-2-9B · usesGoldAmbiguityLabels: true	0.435 proportion	—	尚未评估
method: SGP-Oracle · status: externally reported · backbone: Gemma-2-9B · usesGoldAmbiguityLabels: true	0.156 proportion	—	尚未评估
method: CIGAsk · backbone: Gemma-2-9B	0.774 score (0-1)	—	尚未评估
method: CIGAsk · backbone: Gemma-2-9B	0.749 score (0-1)	—	尚未评估
method: CIGAsk · backbone: Gemma-2-9B	0.813 proportion	—	尚未评估
method: CIGAsk · backbone: Gemma-2-9B	0.031 proportion	—	尚未评估

On the Gemma-2-9B backbone, CIGAsk reports higher F1 than deployable SGP and much higher ambiguous-query clarification with lower clear-query over-clarification, while its F1 remains below the gold-label SGP-Oracle upper bound.

报告指标与观测值

Assessment（0）

关联运行（0）

测量结果