Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Testing Relational Understanding in Text-Guided Image Generation

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 2208.00005 v1 pith:ZIZ6C6VS submitted 2022-07-29 cs.CV cs.AIcs.LG

classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.LG
keywords relationsbasicgenerationimageexaminationhumanmodelmodels
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Relations are basic building blocks of human cognition. Classic and recent work suggests that many relations are early developing, and quickly perceived. Machine models that aspire to human-level perception and reasoning should reflect the ability to recognize and reason generatively about relations. We report a systematic empirical examination of a recent text-guided image generation model (DALL-E 2), using a set of 15 basic physical and social relations studied or proposed in the literature, and judgements from human participants (N = 169). Overall, we find that only ~22% of images matched basic relation prompts. Based on a quantitative examination of people's judgments, we suggest that current image generation models do not yet have a grasp of even basic relations involving simple objects and agents. We examine reasons for model successes and failures, and suggest possible improvements based on computations observed in biological intelligence.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 39 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. Where did the ambiguity go? Examining how multimodal models interpret polysemous words

    cs.AI 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Across 17 image and 15 text models, generated images settle on far fewer senses of ambiguous words than generated sentences, and both fall well short of human diversity.

Pith tools