REVIEW 1 cited by
An Examination of the Compositionality of Large Generative Vision-Language 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
An Examination of the Compositionality of Large Generative Vision-Language Models
read the original abstract
With the success of Large Language Models (LLMs), many Generative Vision-Language Models (GVLMs) have been constructed via multimodal instruction tuning. However, the performance of GVLMs in multimodal compositional reasoning remains under-explored. In this paper, we examine both the evaluation metrics (VisualGPTScore, etc.) and current benchmarks for evaluating the compositionality of GVLMs. We identify the syntactical bias in current benchmarks, which is exploited by the linguistic capability of GVLMs. The bias renders VisualGPTScore an insufficient metric for assessing GVLMs. To combat this, we first introduce a SyntaxBias Score, leveraging LLMs to quantify such bias for mitigation. A challenging new task is subsequently added to evaluate the robustness of GVLMs against inherent inclination toward syntactical correctness. Using the bias-mitigated datasets and the new task, we propose a novel benchmark, namely SyntActically DE-biased benchmark (SADE). Our study provides an unbiased benchmark for the compositionality of GVLMs, facilitating future research in this direction (Code and dataset are available at https://github.com/TeleeMa/SADE).
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
OpenGround: Planning-based Online Perception for Open-World 3D Visual Grounding
OpenGround grounds open-world 3D targets by planning a task chain and dynamically expanding the object lookup table through online 2D segmentation and 3D lifting, achieving SOTA zero-shot ScanRefer accuracy and 46.2% ...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.