REVIEW 5 cited by
GenAI Arena: An Open Evaluation Platform for Generative Models
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
GenAI Arena: An Open Evaluation Platform for Generative Models
read the original abstract
Generative AI has made remarkable strides to revolutionize fields such as image and video generation. These advancements are driven by innovative algorithms, architecture, and data. However, the rapid proliferation of generative models has highlighted a critical gap: the absence of trustworthy evaluation metrics. Current automatic assessments such as FID, CLIP, FVD, etc often fail to capture the nuanced quality and user satisfaction associated with generative outputs. This paper proposes an open platform GenAI-Arena to evaluate different image and video generative models, where users can actively participate in evaluating these models. By leveraging collective user feedback and votes, GenAI-Arena aims to provide a more democratic and accurate measure of model performance. It covers three tasks of text-to-image generation, text-to-video generation, and image editing respectively. Currently, we cover a total of 35 open-source generative models. GenAI-Arena has been operating for seven months, amassing over 9000 votes from the community. We describe our platform, analyze the data, and explain the statistical methods for ranking the models. To further promote the research in building model-based evaluation metrics, we release a cleaned version of our preference data for the three tasks, namely GenAI-Bench. We prompt the existing multi-modal models like Gemini, and GPT-4o to mimic human voting. We compute the accuracy by comparing the model voting with the human voting to understand their judging abilities. Our results show existing multimodal models are still lagging in assessing the generated visual content, even the best model GPT-4o only achieves an average accuracy of 49.19 across the three generative tasks. Open-source MLLMs perform even worse due to the lack of instruction-following and reasoning ability in complex vision scenarios.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
RewardHarness: Self-Evolving Agentic Post-Training
RewardHarness self-evolves a tool-and-skill library from 100 preference examples to reach 47.4% accuracy on image-edit evaluation, beating GPT-5, and yields stronger RL-tuned models.
-
GT-SVJ: Generative-Transformer-Based Self-Supervised Video Judge For Efficient Video Reward Modeling
GT-SVJ turns video generative models into self-supervised reward judges via EBM reformulation and contrastive training on controlled synthetic degradations, claiming SOTA on GenAI-Bench and MonteBench with 30K annotations.
-
Unified Reward Model for Multimodal Understanding and Generation
UnifiedReward is the first unified reward model that jointly assesses multimodal understanding and generation to provide better preference signals for aligning vision models via DPO.
-
Improving Video Generation with Human Feedback
A human preference dataset and VideoReward model enable Flow-DPO and Flow-NRG to produce smoother, better-aligned videos from text prompts in flow-based generators.
-
VisionReward: Fine-Grained Multi-Dimensional Human Preference Learning for Image and Video Generation
VisionReward learns multi-dimensional human preferences for image and video generation via hierarchical assessment and linear weighting, outperforming VideoScore by 17.2% in prediction accuracy and yielding 31.6% high...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.