REVIEW 12 cited by
MLLM-as-a-Judge: Assessing Multimodal LLM-as-a-Judge with Vision-Language Benchmark
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
MLLM-as-a-Judge: Assessing Multimodal LLM-as-a-Judge with Vision-Language Benchmark
read the original abstract
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have gained significant attention recently, showing remarkable potential in artificial general intelligence. However, assessing the utility of MLLMs presents considerable challenges, primarily due to the absence of multimodal benchmarks that align with human preferences. Drawing inspiration from the concept of LLM-as-a-Judge within LLMs, this paper introduces a novel benchmark, termed MLLM-as-a-Judge, to assess the ability of MLLMs in assisting judges across diverse modalities, encompassing three distinct tasks: Scoring Evaluation, Pair Comparison, and Batch Ranking. Our study reveals that, while MLLMs demonstrate remarkable human-like discernment in Pair Comparison, there is a significant divergence from human preferences in Scoring Evaluation and Batch Ranking. Furthermore, a closer examination reveals persistent challenges in the judgment capacities of LLMs, including diverse biases, hallucinatory responses, and inconsistencies in judgment, even in advanced models such as GPT-4V. These findings emphasize the pressing need for enhancements and further research efforts to be undertaken before regarding MLLMs as fully reliable evaluators. In light of this, we advocate for additional efforts dedicated to supporting the continuous development within the domain of MLLM functioning as judges. The code and dataset are publicly available at our project homepage: \url{https://mllm-judge.github.io/}.
Forward citations
Cited by 12 Pith papers
-
MentalThink: Shaping Thoughts in Mental SVG World
MLLMs that generate and render SVG sketches as multi-turn intermediate reasoning steps reach 55.1% on VSIBench and 76.0% on MindCube, far above the Qwen2.5-VL-7B backbone.
-
NextMotionQA: Benchmarking and Judging Human Motion Understanding with Vision-Language Models
NextMotionQA benchmark reveals VLMs have critical gaps in fine-grained human motion understanding and align with experts on coarse judgment (κ=0.70) but not fine-grained (κ=0.10).
-
OSReward: Instituting Standardized Evaluation for Cross-Platform Computer-Use Reward Models
VLM judges of CUA trajectories are systematically lenient; OSReward measures this with human gold, and OS-Shepherd open models close most of the reliability gap cheaply.
-
Brevity is the Soul of Inference Efficiency: Inducing Concision in VLMs via Data Curation
Curating pretraining data for concision in VLMs produces models with up to 35x lower cost-of-pass at matched accuracy by reducing output token count.
-
Brevity is the Soul of Inference Efficiency: Inducing Concision in VLMs via Data Curation
Curating concise data for VLMs induces brevity, delivering 35x lower Cost-of-Pass at near-identical accuracy and higher matched-length accuracy than uncurated baselines.
-
Chain-of-Models: Cross-Model Auditing for Bias-Robust LLM Judges
Per-bias selection of a cross-family LLM auditor lifts biased-judgment accuracy from 0.805/0.824 baselines to 0.884.
-
Deep Pre-Alignment for VLMs
Deep Pre-Alignment uses a small VLM perceiver instead of ViT to pre-align visual features with LLM text space, yielding 1.9-3.0 point gains on multimodal benchmarks and 32.9% less language forgetting.
-
Does Pass Rate Tell the Whole Story? Evaluating Design Constraint Compliance in LLM-based Issue Resolution
LLM agents resolve fewer than half of issues while satisfying design constraints despite passing tests, as shown by a benchmark of 495 issues and 1787 constraints from six repositories.
-
Towards an AI co-scientist
A multi-agent AI system generates novel biomedical hypotheses that show promising experimental validation in drug repurposing for leukemia, new targets for liver fibrosis, and a bacterial gene transfer mechanism.
-
LLM-as-a-Verifier: A General-Purpose Verification Framework
Computing the expectation over scoring-token logits instead of taking argmax enables verification to scale along granularity, repetition, and criteria decomposition, achieving state-of-the-art on four agentic benchmar...
-
LLM-as-a-Verifier: A General-Purpose Verification Framework
Expecting over scoring-token logits yields continuous, scalable verification that improves agent trajectory selection and dense RL rewards across coding, robotics, and medical benchmarks.
-
LLMs-as-Judges: A Comprehensive Survey on LLM-based Evaluation Methods
A survey that organizes LLMs-as-judges research into functionality, methodology, applications, meta-evaluation, and limitations.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.