None of the four tested text-to-image consistency metrics satisfies all proposed validity criteria, and the VQA-based metrics appear to rely largely on text priors such as yes-bias.
Metrology for AI: From Benchmarks to Instruments
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
1
Pith paper citing it
abstract
In this paper we present the first steps towards hardening the science of measuring AI systems, by adopting metrology, the science of measurement and its application, and applying it to human (crowd) powered evaluations. We begin with the intuitive observation that evaluating the performance of an AI system is a form of measurement. In all other science and engineering disciplines, the devices used to measure are called instruments, and all measurements are recorded with respect to the characteristics of the instruments used. One does not report mass, speed, or length, for example, of a studied object without disclosing the precision (measurement variance) and resolution (smallest detectable change) of the instrument used. It is extremely common in the AI literature to compare the performance of two systems by using a crowd-sourced dataset as an instrument, but failing to report if the performance difference lies within the capability of that instrument to measure. To illustrate the adoption of metrology to benchmark datasets we use the word similarity benchmark WS353 and several previously published experiments that use it for evaluation.
fields
cs.CL 1years
2024 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
What makes a good metric? Evaluating automatic metrics for text-to-image consistency
None of the four tested text-to-image consistency metrics satisfies all proposed validity criteria, and the VQA-based metrics appear to rely largely on text priors such as yes-bias.