| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 10 decomposed | 13 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Performs exact and fuzzy deduplication across 6.3 trillion tokens spanning 167 languages by combining mC4 and OSCAR source datasets with language-aware normalization and document-level hashing. Uses probabilistic data structures (likely Bloom filters or MinHash) to identify and remove duplicate content while preserving language-specific variations, reducing storage footprint and preventing model training on redundant examples that would skew learned distributions.
Unique: Combines mC4 (English-heavy, 100+ languages) and OSCAR (more balanced, 166 languages) with unified deduplication pipeline, then applies language-aware normalization before hashing — most open datasets deduplicate within a single source, not across heterogeneous multilingual sources with different crawl dates and quality profiles
vs alternatives: Larger and more language-inclusive than mC4 alone (6.3T vs 750B tokens) and more deduplicated than raw OSCAR, making it more suitable for training models that perform well across low-resource languages without overfitting to English-dominant patterns
Applies multi-stage quality filtering using language-specific heuristics (character distributions, script validity, toxicity markers, repetition patterns) to remove low-quality documents before inclusion in the final dataset. Filters are tuned per-language family (Latin, CJK, Indic, etc.) to account for different character frequencies, punctuation norms, and valid repetition patterns, preventing models from learning from spam, gibberish, or machine-generated noise while preserving legitimate content in morphologically-rich languages.
Unique: Applies language-family-aware filtering rules (separate thresholds for Latin, CJK, Indic, Arabic scripts) rather than universal heuristics, recognizing that character frequency distributions and valid repetition patterns differ dramatically across writing systems — most datasets use single global quality threshold regardless of language
vs alternatives: More linguistically-informed than mC4's basic filtering and more transparent than OSCAR's undocumented quality pipeline, reducing the risk of removing legitimate low-resource language content while still eliminating spam and corruption
Organizes 6.3 trillion tokens across 167 languages with explicit stratification, allowing users to sample or weight languages during training to balance representation and prevent high-resource languages (English, Chinese, Spanish) from dominating model behavior. Provides language-level metadata and sampling utilities so practitioners can construct training splits that reflect target deployment demographics rather than web-crawl frequency distributions, which are heavily skewed toward English and a few other high-resource languages.
Unique: Explicitly exposes language-level composition metadata and enables stratified sampling, whereas mC4 and OSCAR provide language labels but no built-in tools for rebalancing — CulturaX treats language distribution as a first-class concern rather than an afterthought, enabling practitioners to intentionally design inclusive training distributions
vs alternatives: Enables fairer multilingual models than training on raw web distributions (which are ~50% English), and more transparent than datasets that hide language composition, allowing teams to audit and justify their language representation choices
Merges mC4 (English-heavy, 100+ languages, 750B tokens) and OSCAR (more balanced, 166 languages, 180B tokens) into a single unified corpus with consistent schema, metadata format, and access patterns through Hugging Face Datasets. Handles schema reconciliation, timestamp alignment, and source attribution so users can trace documents back to original crawls while treating the combined dataset as a single coherent resource, eliminating the need to manage two separate pipelines or worry about overlapping content.
Unique: Provides unified access to two major web-crawled corpora (mC4 and OSCAR) with deduplication across sources and consistent metadata schema, whereas users typically download and manage mC4 and OSCAR separately — CulturaX eliminates the operational burden of maintaining two pipelines and handles cross-source deduplication automatically
vs alternatives: More convenient than downloading mC4 and OSCAR separately and more comprehensive than either source alone, reducing engineering overhead for teams that want both breadth (OSCAR's language coverage) and depth (mC4's English quality)
Provides pre-computed statistics at token, document, and language levels (token counts per language, document length distributions, character set coverage, script family breakdown) accessible through Hugging Face Datasets metadata API. Enables practitioners to understand dataset composition without downloading the full corpus, supporting informed decisions about sampling strategies, language weighting, and expected model behavior across languages without requiring custom analysis scripts.
Unique: Pre-computes and exposes language-level token statistics through Hugging Face Datasets metadata API, allowing users to query composition without downloading the full corpus — most datasets provide only total token counts or require users to scan the full dataset to understand language distribution
vs alternatives: Faster and more convenient than analyzing raw mC4 or OSCAR directly, and more granular than summary statistics, enabling data-driven decisions about language weighting and sampling without custom preprocessing
Integrates with Hugging Face Datasets library's streaming, caching, and distributed loading infrastructure, enabling efficient access patterns for training at scale. Supports streaming mode (load documents on-demand without downloading full corpus), local caching with automatic decompression, and distributed data loading across multiple GPUs/TPUs through Datasets' built-in sharding and sampling utilities, reducing memory footprint and enabling training on machines with limited disk space.
Unique: Leverages Hugging Face Datasets' native streaming and distributed loading infrastructure rather than requiring custom data loaders, enabling zero-copy access patterns and automatic sharding across distributed training setups — raw mC4 and OSCAR require custom loading code or manual sharding logic
vs alternatives: More memory-efficient than downloading the full corpus and more convenient than building custom streaming loaders, enabling training on resource-constrained hardware while maintaining competitive throughput through Datasets' optimized I/O pipeline
Enables streaming access to the 6.3 trillion token dataset without downloading the full corpus, using Hugging Face Datasets streaming mode to load documents on-the-fly during training. Supports batching, shuffling, and caching strategies optimized for distributed training pipelines to minimize memory footprint while maintaining training efficiency.
Unique: Implements streaming access via Hugging Face Datasets with optimized batching and shuffling for distributed training, enabling training on 6.3 trillion tokens without materializing the full dataset on disk
vs alternatives: More practical than downloading the full dataset for resource-constrained environments; more efficient than fetching documents one-at-a-time by using batched streaming with configurable buffer sizes
Automatically detects language for each document and normalizes text across diverse writing systems (Latin, Cyrillic, Arabic, CJK, Indic scripts, etc.) to ensure consistent preprocessing across all 167 languages. Uses language detection models (fastText or similar) with confidence thresholding and script-aware normalization (Unicode normalization, diacritic handling) to handle multilingual text robustly.
Unique: Applies language detection and script normalization uniformly across all 167 languages using a single model and normalization pipeline, rather than language-specific preprocessing rules that would require 167 separate implementations
vs alternatives: More robust than mC4/OSCAR's language detection by using modern neural models; more comprehensive than single-language datasets by handling script diversity (Latin, Cyrillic, Arabic, CJK, Indic) in a unified pipeline
+2 more capabilities
Provides a standardized evaluation framework for code generation models that accepts generated code in 17 programming languages (C, C++, C#, Java, Kotlin, Go, Rust, Python, Ruby, PHP, JavaScript, Perl, Haskell, OCaml, Scala, D, Pascal) and validates correctness through actual execution against unit tests via the ExecEval Docker-based execution engine. Uses a centralized problem definition model with src_uid foreign keys linking generated code to shared problem descriptions and unittest_db.json, enabling consistent evaluation across language variants of the same problem.
Unique: Combines 25M training examples across 7,500 unique problems with an execution-based evaluation pipeline (ExecEval) that actually runs generated code in Docker containers against unit tests, rather than relying on static analysis or string matching. The src_uid linking system creates a normalized data model where problem descriptions and tests are stored once and referenced by all language variants, eliminating duplication and ensuring consistency.
vs alternatives: Larger scale (25M examples vs typical 10-100K) and true execution-based validation across more languages (17 vs 4-6) than HumanEval or CodeXGLUE, with explicit support for code translation and repair tasks beyond generation.
Implements a foreign key linking system where all task-specific datasets (program synthesis, code translation, APR, retrieval) reference shared problem definitions via src_uid identifiers. Problem descriptions and unit tests are stored once in centralized problem_descriptions.jsonl and unittest_db.json files, then linked by src_uid to avoid duplication. The Hugging Face datasets API automatically resolves these links during data loading, returning enriched DatasetDict objects with problem context pre-joined to task examples.
Unique: Uses a normalized relational data model (src_uid as foreign key) for a code benchmark, treating problem definitions as a separate entity layer rather than embedding them in each task dataset. This is more sophisticated than typical flat-file benchmark structures and enables consistent multi-task evaluation on identical problems.
xCodeEval scores higher at 67/100 vs CulturaX at 61/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
vs alternatives: More efficient than duplicating problem descriptions across 7 task datasets (reduces storage by ~30-40%), and enables automatic link resolution via Hugging Face API unlike manual CSV joins in CodeXGLUE or HumanEval variants.
Provides a Python API for loading xCodeEval datasets from Hugging Face Hub (NTU-NLP-sg/xCodeEval) with automatic src_uid-based linking between task datasets and shared problem definitions. The datasets library handles data downloading, caching, and streaming, while the xCodeEval integration automatically joins task examples with problem_descriptions.jsonl and unittest_db.json using src_uid foreign keys. Returns DatasetDict objects with enriched examples ready for model training or evaluation.
Unique: Integrates xCodeEval with Hugging Face datasets library, providing automatic src_uid resolution and streaming support. Treats data loading as a first-class concern with built-in linking logic, rather than requiring manual JSON parsing.
vs alternatives: More convenient than manual Git LFS downloads because it handles caching and automatic linking, and integrates seamlessly with Hugging Face training pipelines vs custom data loaders.
Provides an alternative data access method using Git LFS for users who prefer direct file access or need selective dataset downloads. Supports cloning the repository with LFS disabled, then pulling specific task files or problem definitions on demand. Useful for custom processing pipelines or environments where Python/Hugging Face is not available, though requires manual src_uid linking to join task examples with problem definitions.
Unique: Provides Git LFS-based alternative to Hugging Face API, enabling direct file access and selective downloads. Requires manual src_uid linking but offers more control over data access patterns.
vs alternatives: More flexible than Hugging Face API for selective downloads and custom pipelines, but requires more manual work for src_uid linking and lacks automatic caching/streaming.
Implements a standardized three-phase evaluation pipeline (Phase 1: Generation, Phase 2: Execution, Phase 3: Metrics) that applies consistently across all 7 tasks (program synthesis, code translation, APR, tag classification, code compilation, NL-code retrieval, code-code retrieval). Phase 1 generates or retrieves code, Phase 2 executes it via ExecEval or computes retrieval metrics, and Phase 3 aggregates results into pass@k, MRR, NDCG, or other task-specific metrics. Enables direct comparison of model performance across tasks.
Unique: Defines a unified three-phase evaluation pipeline that applies to all 7 tasks, treating generation, execution, and metric computation as separate concerns. Enables consistent evaluation methodology across diverse task types (generation, translation, retrieval, classification).
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than task-specific evaluation scripts because it provides a unified framework for all 7 tasks, and enables direct comparison of model performance across different task types.
Evaluates code generation models on the program synthesis task by accepting natural language problem descriptions and generating code solutions in any of 17 languages. The evaluation pipeline (Phase 1: Generation, Phase 2: Execution, Phase 3: Metrics) runs generated code against unit tests via ExecEval, computing pass@k metrics (pass@1, pass@10, etc.) that measure the probability of finding a correct solution within k samples. Supports both single-solution and multi-sample evaluation modes for assessing model reliability.
Unique: Implements a three-phase evaluation pipeline (Generation → Execution → Metrics) with explicit pass@k computation that measures the probability of finding a correct solution within k attempts, rather than just binary pass/fail. Supports multi-sample evaluation across 17 languages with language-specific compiler configurations and timeout handling.
vs alternatives: More rigorous than HumanEval's simple pass@k because it handles language-specific compilation errors and timeouts explicitly, and scales to 25M training examples vs HumanEval's 164 problems.
Evaluates code translation models by accepting source code in one language and generated translations in a target language, then validating functional equivalence through execution against shared unit tests. The translation evaluation pipeline compiles and executes both source and translated code against the same unittest_db.json test cases, comparing outputs to detect translation errors. Supports all 17 language pairs (though not all pairs may have training data) and uses language-specific compiler mappings to handle syntax differences.
Unique: Validates code translation by executing both source and target code against identical unit tests and comparing outputs, ensuring functional equivalence rather than syntactic similarity. Uses language-specific compiler mappings to handle the complexity of 17 different compilation environments and their idiosyncrasies.
vs alternatives: More rigorous than BLEU-score-based translation metrics because it validates actual functional correctness through execution, and covers more language pairs (17 vs typical 2-4) with explicit compiler integration.
Evaluates program repair models by providing buggy code snippets and expecting corrected versions that pass unit tests. The APR evaluation pipeline executes repaired code against unittest_db.json test cases, measuring whether the repair successfully fixes the bug without introducing new failures. Supports repairs across all 17 languages and uses the same execution-based validation as program synthesis, enabling direct comparison of repair quality.
Unique: Treats program repair as an executable task where success is measured by unit test passage, rather than syntactic similarity to reference repairs. Integrates with the same ExecEval pipeline as program synthesis, enabling direct performance comparison between generation and repair models.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than traditional APR benchmarks (Defects4J, QuixBugs) because it covers 17 languages and 7,500 problems vs 395 Java bugs, and uses consistent execution-based metrics across all repair types.
+5 more capabilities