REVIEW 1 cited by
From Descriptive Richness to Bias: Unveiling the Dark Side of Generative Image Caption Enrichment
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
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have enhanced the capacity of vision-language models to caption visual text. This generative approach to image caption enrichment further makes textual captions more descriptive, improving alignment with the visual context. However, while many studies focus on benefits of generative caption enrichment (GCE), are there any negative side effects? We compare standard-format captions and recent GCE processes from the perspectives of "gender bias" and "hallucination", showing that enriched captions suffer from increased gender bias and hallucination. Furthermore, models trained on these enriched captions amplify gender bias by an average of 30.9% and increase hallucination by 59.5%. This study serves as a caution against the trend of making captions more descriptive.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
CaptionSmiths: Flexibly Controlling Language Pattern in Image Captioning
A single LLaVA-based captioning model continuously controls caption length, descriptiveness, and word uniqueness by interpolating between learned endpoint conditioning vectors.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.