REVIEW 6 cited by
WildVision: Evaluating Vision-Language Models in the Wild with Human Preferences
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
read the original abstract
Recent breakthroughs in vision-language models (VLMs) emphasize the necessity of benchmarking human preferences in real-world multimodal interactions. To address this gap, we launched WildVision-Arena (WV-Arena), an online platform that collects human preferences to evaluate VLMs. We curated WV-Bench by selecting 500 high-quality samples from 8,000 user submissions in WV-Arena. WV-Bench uses GPT-4 as the judge to compare each VLM with Claude-3-Sonnet, achieving a Spearman correlation of 0.94 with the WV-Arena Elo. This significantly outperforms other benchmarks like MMVet, MMMU, and MMStar. Our comprehensive analysis of 20K real-world interactions reveals important insights into the failure cases of top-performing VLMs. For example, we find that although GPT-4V surpasses many other models like Reka-Flash, Opus, and Yi-VL-Plus in simple visual recognition and reasoning tasks, it still faces challenges with subtle contextual cues, spatial reasoning, visual imagination, and expert domain knowledge. Additionally, current VLMs exhibit issues with hallucinations and safety when intentionally provoked. We are releasing our chat and feedback data to further advance research in the field of VLMs.
Forward citations
Cited by 6 Pith papers
-
Copilot Arena: A Platform for Code LLM Evaluation in the Wild
An in-IDE pairwise-preference platform for code LLMs reveals that real developer choices rank models differently than static coding benchmarks.
-
Understanding Space Is Rocket Science -- Only Top Reasoning Models Can Solve Spatial Understanding Tasks
A new contrastive real-image benchmark shows most vision-language models fail spatial relation tasks, while chain-of-thought reasoning models approach human-level accuracy.
-
Improving Large Vision and Language Models by Learning from a Panel of Peers
A panel of LVLMs that generate, evaluate, and learn from each other's outputs improves average benchmark scores by 9 points across 15 tasks.
-
GenRecal: Generation after Recalibration from Large to Small Vision-Language Models
A learnable Recalibrator bridges different tokenizers so that small VLMs can distill knowledge from any large VLM, improving their benchmark scores.
-
VL-GenRM: Enhancing Vision-Language Verification via Vision Experts and Iterative Training
A vision-expert-filtered, chain-of-thought-guided, iteratively fine-tuned reward model boosts a compact 7B model's ability to judge vision-language responses, especially detecting hallucinations.
-
MM-RLHF: The Next Step Forward in Multimodal LLM Alignment
A human-annotated multimodal preference dataset plus critique-based reward modeling and reward-margin-weighted DPO improves MLLM performance across many benchmarks.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.