Video-Bench: Human-Aligned Video Generation Benchmark
read the original abstract
Video generation assessment is essential for ensuring that generative models produce visually realistic, high-quality videos while aligning with human expectations. Current video generation benchmarks fall into two main categories: traditional benchmarks, which use metrics and embeddings to evaluate generated video quality across multiple dimensions but often lack alignment with human judgments; and large language model (LLM)-based benchmarks, though capable of human-like reasoning, are constrained by a limited understanding of video quality metrics and cross-modal consistency. To address these challenges and establish a benchmark that better aligns with human preferences, this paper introduces Video-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark featuring a rich prompt suite and extensive evaluation dimensions. This benchmark represents the first attempt to systematically leverage MLLMs across all dimensions relevant to video generation assessment in generative models. By incorporating few-shot scoring and chain-of-query techniques, Video-Bench provides a structured, scalable approach to generated video evaluation. Experiments on advanced models including Sora demonstrate that Video-Bench achieves superior alignment with human preferences across all dimensions. Moreover, in instances where our framework's assessments diverge from human evaluations, it consistently offers more objective and accurate insights, suggesting an even greater potential advantage over traditional human judgment.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
VideoWeaver: Evaluating and Evolving Skills for Agentic Long Video Generation
Introduces VideoWeaver benchmark (16 categories, 285 cases) plus agent-as-judge and skill-evolution algorithm to assess and improve agentic long video generation across frameworks.
-
How Far Are Video Models from True Multimodal Reasoning?
Current video models succeed on basic understanding but achieve under 25% success on logically grounded generation and near 0% on interactive generation, exposing gaps in multimodal reasoning.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.