Pith. sign in

Redundancy Principles for MLLMs Benchmarks

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

1 Pith paper citing it
abstract

With the rapid iteration of Multi-modality Large Language Models (MLLMs) and the evolving demands of the field, the number of benchmarks produced annually has surged into the hundreds. The rapid growth has inevitably led to significant redundancy among benchmarks. Therefore, it is crucial to take a step back and critically assess the current state of redundancy and propose targeted principles for constructing effective MLLM benchmarks. In this paper, we focus on redundancy from three key perspectives: 1) Redundancy of benchmark capability dimensions, 2) Redundancy in the number of test questions, and 3) Cross-benchmark redundancy within specific domains. Through the comprehensive analysis over hundreds of MLLMs' performance across more than 20 benchmarks, we aim to quantitatively measure the level of redundancy lies in existing MLLM evaluations, provide valuable insights to guide the future development of MLLM benchmarks, and offer strategies to refine and address redundancy issues effectively. The code is available at https://github.com/zzc-1998/Benchmark-Redundancy.

fields

cs.CL 1

years

2025 1

verdicts

CONDITIONAL 1

representative citing papers

Affordance Benchmark for MLLMs

cs.CL · 2025-06-01 · conditional · novelty 6.0

A new 2,000-question benchmark finds multimodal AI models recognize object affordances far worse than humans, with top model Gemini-2.0-Pro at 18.05% versus 85.34% human best.

citing papers explorer

Showing 1 of 1 citing paper.

  • Affordance Benchmark for MLLMs cs.CL · 2025-06-01 · conditional · none · ref 60 · internal anchor

    A new 2,000-question benchmark finds multimodal AI models recognize object affordances far worse than humans, with top model Gemini-2.0-Pro at 18.05% versus 85.34% human best.