Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

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

arxiv 2205.10646 v2 pith:YY2IOUD2 submitted 2022-05-21 cs.CL

Context Matters for Image Descriptions for Accessibility: Challenges for Referenceless Evaluation Metrics

classification cs.CL
keywords metricsdescriptionsreferencelesstheyusersaccessibilityaccessibleaddress
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Few images on the Web receive alt-text descriptions that would make them accessible to blind and low vision (BLV) users. Image-based NLG systems have progressed to the point where they can begin to address this persistent societal problem, but these systems will not be fully successful unless we evaluate them on metrics that guide their development correctly. Here, we argue against current referenceless metrics -- those that don't rely on human-generated ground-truth descriptions -- on the grounds that they do not align with the needs of BLV users. The fundamental shortcoming of these metrics is that they do not take context into account, whereas contextual information is highly valued by BLV users. To substantiate these claims, we present a study with BLV participants who rated descriptions along a variety of dimensions. An in-depth analysis reveals that the lack of context-awareness makes current referenceless metrics inadequate for advancing image accessibility. As a proof-of-concept, we provide a contextual version of the referenceless metric CLIPScore which begins to address the disconnect to the BLV data. An accessible HTML version of this paper is available at https://elisakreiss.github.io/contextual-description-evaluation/paper/reflessmetrics.html

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Evaluating AI-Generated Images of Cultural Artifacts with Community-Informed Rubrics

    cs.CY 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Community members from the UK blind community, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu helped define what counts as culturally appropriate depictions of artifacts, and the authors tested whether those definitions can be turned into re...

  2. Evaluating AI-Generated Images of Cultural Artifacts with Community-Informed Rubrics

    cs.CY 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Case studies with blind UK residents and people from Kerala and Tamil Nadu demonstrate that community input at the systematization stage produces culturally grounded definitions of appropriateness for text-to-image mo...