REVIEW 1 cited by
MVP-Bench: Can Large Vision--Language Models Conduct Multi-level Visual Perception Like Humans?
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
MVP-Bench: Can Large Vision--Language Models Conduct Multi-level Visual Perception Like Humans?
read the original abstract
Humans perform visual perception at multiple levels, including low-level object recognition and high-level semantic interpretation such as behavior understanding. Subtle differences in low-level details can lead to substantial changes in high-level perception. For example, substituting the shopping bag held by a person with a gun suggests violent behavior, implying criminal or violent activity. Despite significant advancements in various multimodal tasks, Large Visual-Language Models (LVLMs) remain unexplored in their capabilities to conduct such multi-level visual perceptions. To investigate the perception gap between LVLMs and humans, we introduce MVP-Bench, the first visual-language benchmark systematically evaluating both low- and high-level visual perception of LVLMs. We construct MVP-Bench across natural and synthetic images to investigate how manipulated content influences model perception. Using MVP-Bench, we diagnose the visual perception of 10 open-source and 2 closed-source LVLMs, showing that high-level perception tasks significantly challenge existing LVLMs. The state-of-the-art GPT-4o only achieves an accuracy of $56\%$ on Yes/No questions, compared with $74\%$ in low-level scenarios. Furthermore, the performance gap between natural and manipulated images indicates that current LVLMs do not generalize in understanding the visual semantics of synthetic images as humans do. Our data and code are publicly available at https://github.com/GuanzhenLi/MVP-Bench.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
ProEvent: An Event-centric Benchmark for Proactive Agents
ProEvent is a benchmark showing LLM agents keep a user's event timetable from chats poorly, with the best fully-correct score at 27.2%.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.