Pith. sign in

From GPT-4 to Gemini and Beyond: Assessing the Landscape of MLLMs on Generalizability, Trustworthiness and Causality through Four Modalities

1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.

1 Pith paper citing it
abstract

Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have shown impressive abilities in generating reasonable responses with respect to multi-modal contents. However, there is still a wide gap between the performance of recent MLLM-based applications and the expectation of the broad public, even though the most powerful OpenAI's GPT-4 and Google's Gemini have been deployed. This paper strives to enhance understanding of the gap through the lens of a qualitative study on the generalizability, trustworthiness, and causal reasoning capabilities of recent proprietary and open-source MLLMs across four modalities: ie, text, code, image, and video, ultimately aiming to improve the transparency of MLLMs. We believe these properties are several representative factors that define the reliability of MLLMs, in supporting various downstream applications. To be specific, we evaluate the closed-source GPT-4 and Gemini and 6 open-source LLMs and MLLMs. Overall we evaluate 230 manually designed cases, where the qualitative results are then summarized into 12 scores (ie, 4 modalities times 3 properties). In total, we uncover 14 empirical findings that are useful to understand the capabilities and limitations of both proprietary and open-source MLLMs, towards more reliable downstream multi-modal applications.

citation-role summary

background 1

citation-polarity summary

fields

cs.AI 1

years

2025 1

verdicts

REJECT 1

roles

background 1

polarities

unclear 1

representative citing papers

citing papers explorer

Showing 1 of 1 citing paper.

  • Dynamic Chain-of-Thought: Towards Adaptive Deep Reasoning cs.AI · 2025-02-07 · reject · none · ref 13 · internal anchor

    D-CoT claims to cut reasoning time, steps, and tokens versus DeepSeek R1, but the comparison is between a Python simulation and a real LLM, without any accuracy check.