LMMs-Eval: Reality Check on the Evaluation of Large Multimodal Models
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Presents a comprehensive evaluation suite called LMMs-Eval to assess the performance and capabilities of large multimodal models
- Highlights the need for a standardized, holistic evaluation framework to better understand the strengths and limitations of these complex models
- Includes diverse benchmarks that cover a wide range of multimodal tasks and challenges
Plain English Explanation
Large multimodal models (LMMs) are a type of artificial intelligence that can process and generate a variety of media, such as text, images, and video. These models have shown impressive capabilities, but it can be difficult to fully understand their strengths and limitations.
The researchers created a new evaluation suite called LMMs-Eval to provide a comprehensive way to assess the performance of LMMs. This suite includes a diverse set of benchmarks that cover a wide range of multimodal tasks, such as image captioning, visual question answering, and multimodal reasoning.
By using this evaluation suite, researchers and developers can get a better sense of how well LMMs are able to handle different types of multimodal inputs and tasks. This can help identify areas where the models excel, as well as areas where they may struggle. Overall, the goal is to provide a more standardized and holistic way to evaluate these complex models, which can ultimately lead to the development of more capable and trustworthy multimodal AI systems.
Technical Explanation
The LMMs-Eval evaluation suite includes a diverse set of benchmarks that cover a wide range of multimodal tasks, such as:
- Image captioning: Generating descriptive text for an input image
- Visual question answering: Answering questions about the content of an image
- Multimodal reasoning: Combining information from text and images to answer questions or solve problems
The researchers designed these benchmarks to be challenging and representative of real-world multimodal scenarios. They also incorporated various forms of bias, noise, and adversarial examples to better assess the robustness and reliability of LMMs.
In addition to the benchmark tasks, the LMMs-Eval suite also includes tools for evaluating other important aspects of LMMs, such as their calibration, trustworthiness, and efficiency. These additional evaluations can provide a more comprehensive understanding of the models' capabilities and limitations.
Critical Analysis
The LMMs-Eval suite represents a significant step forward in the evaluation of large multimodal models. By providing a standardized and comprehensive evaluation framework, the researchers have addressed an important gap in the field. However, there are a few potential limitations and areas for further research:
-
Generalization to real-world scenarios: While the benchmarks in LMMs-Eval are designed to be challenging and representative of real-world multimodal tasks, it remains to be seen how well the models will perform in truly unpredictable, uncontrolled environments.
-
Scalability and computational efficiency: As LMMs continue to grow in size and complexity, the computational resources required to train and evaluate them may become a significant challenge. The researchers mention efficiency as a key consideration, but more work may be needed in this area.
-
Ethical and societal implications: The widespread deployment of powerful multimodal models raises important questions about their potential for misuse, bias, and unintended consequences. The LMMs-Eval suite does not explicitly address these concerns, which should be a priority for future research.
Overall, the LMMs-Eval evaluation suite represents a valuable contribution to the field of multimodal AI. By providing a standardized and comprehensive way to assess the performance of large multimodal models, the researchers have laid the groundwork for more robust and trustworthy AI systems. However, ongoing research and critical analysis will be necessary to fully address the challenges and implications of these powerful technologies.
Conclusion
The LMMs-Eval evaluation suite presents a comprehensive and standardized framework for assessing the performance and capabilities of large multimodal models. By including a diverse set of benchmarks that cover a wide range of multimodal tasks, the researchers have provided a valuable tool for understanding the strengths and limitations of these complex AI systems.
The development of LMMs-Eval is an important step towards the creation of more robust, trustworthy, and efficient multimodal AI. The insights gained from this evaluation suite can inform the design and development of future multimodal models, ultimately leading to the creation of more capable and responsible artificial intelligence systems that can positively impact a wide range of applications and industries.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
LMMs-Eval: Reality Check on the Evaluation of Large Multimodal Models
Kaichen Zhang, Bo Li, Peiyuan Zhang, Fanyi Pu, Joshua Adrian Cahyono, Kairui Hu, Shuai Liu, Yuanhan Zhang, Jingkang Yang, Chunyuan Li, Ziwei Liu
The advances of large foundation models necessitate wide-coverage, low-cost, and zero-contamination benchmarks. Despite continuous exploration of language model evaluations, comprehensive studies on the evaluation of Large Multi-modal Models (LMMs) remain limited. In this work, we introduce LMMS-EVAL, a unified and standardized multimodal benchmark framework with over 50 tasks and more than 10 models to promote transparent and reproducible evaluations. Although LMMS-EVAL offers comprehensive coverage, we find it still falls short in achieving low cost and zero contamination. To approach this evaluation trilemma, we further introduce LMMS-EVAL LITE, a pruned evaluation toolkit that emphasizes both coverage and efficiency. Additionally, we present Multimodal LIVEBENCH that utilizes continuously updating news and online forums to assess models' generalization abilities in the wild, featuring a low-cost and zero-contamination evaluation approach. In summary, our work highlights the importance of considering the evaluation trilemma and provides practical solutions to navigate the trade-offs in evaluating large multi-modal models, paving the way for more effective and reliable benchmarking of LMMs. We opensource our codebase and maintain leaderboard of LIVEBENCH at https://github.com/EvolvingLMMs-Lab/lmms-eval and https://huggingface.co/spaces/lmms-lab/LiveBench.
Read more7/18/2024
0
MMEvalPro: Calibrating Multimodal Benchmarks Towards Trustworthy and Efficient Evaluation
Jinsheng Huang, Liang Chen, Taian Guo, Fu Zeng, Yusheng Zhao, Bohan Wu, Ye Yuan, Haozhe Zhao, Zhihui Guo, Yichi Zhang, Jingyang Yuan, Wei Ju, Luchen Liu, Tianyu Liu, Baobao Chang, Ming Zhang
Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) exhibit impressive cross-modal understanding and reasoning abilities, often assessed through multiple-choice questions (MCQs) that include an image, a question, and several options. However, many benchmarks used for such evaluations suffer from systematic biases. Remarkably, Large Language Models (LLMs) without any visual perception capabilities achieve non-trivial performance, undermining the credibility of these evaluations. To address this issue while maintaining the efficiency of MCQ evaluations, we propose MMEvalPro, a benchmark designed to avoid Type-I errors through a trilogy evaluation pipeline and more rigorous metrics. For each original question from existing benchmarks, human annotators augment it by creating one perception question and one knowledge anchor question through a meticulous annotation process. MMEvalPro comprises $2,138$ question triplets, totaling $6,414$ distinct questions. Two-thirds of these questions are manually labeled by human experts, while the rest are sourced from existing benchmarks (MMMU, ScienceQA, and MathVista). Compared with the existing benchmarks, our experiments with the latest LLMs and LMMs demonstrate that MMEvalPro is more challenging (the best LMM lags behind human performance by $31.73%$, compared to an average gap of $8.03%$ in previous benchmarks) and more trustworthy (the best LLM trails the best LMM by $23.09%$, whereas the gap for previous benchmarks is just $14.64%$). Our in-depth analysis explains the reason for the large performance gap and justifies the trustworthiness of evaluation, underscoring its significant potential for advancing future research.
Read more7/2/2024
0
A Survey on Benchmarks of Multimodal Large Language Models
Jian Li, Weiheng Lu, Hao Fei, Meng Luo, Ming Dai, Min Xia, Yizhang Jin, Zhenye Gan, Ding Qi, Chaoyou Fu, Ying Tai, Wankou Yang, Yabiao Wang, Chengjie Wang
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are gaining increasing popularity in both academia and industry due to their remarkable performance in various applications such as visual question answering, visual perception, understanding, and reasoning. Over the past few years, significant efforts have been made to examine MLLMs from multiple perspectives. This paper presents a comprehensive review of 200 benchmarks and evaluations for MLLMs, focusing on (1)perception and understanding, (2)cognition and reasoning, (3)specific domains, (4)key capabilities, and (5)other modalities. Finally, we discuss the limitations of the current evaluation methods for MLLMs and explore promising future directions. Our key argument is that evaluation should be regarded as a crucial discipline to support the development of MLLMs better. For more details, please visit our GitHub repository: https://github.com/swordlidev/Evaluation-Multimodal-LLMs-Survey.
Read more9/9/2024
💬
0
MM-InstructEval: Zero-Shot Evaluation of (Multimodal) Large Language Models on Multimodal Reasoning Tasks
Xiaocui Yang, Wenfang Wu, Shi Feng, Ming Wang, Daling Wang, Yang Li, Qi Sun, Yifei Zhang, Xiaoming Fu, Soujanya Poria
The rising popularity of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) has sparked a significant increase in research dedicated to evaluating these models. However, current evaluation studies predominantly concentrate on the ability of models to comprehend and reason within a unimodal (vision-only) context, overlooking critical performance evaluations in complex multimodal reasoning tasks that integrate both visual and text contexts. Furthermore, tasks that demand reasoning across multiple modalities pose greater challenges and require a deep understanding of multimodal contexts. In this paper, we introduce a comprehensive assessment framework named MM-InstructEval, which integrates a diverse array of metrics to provide an extensive evaluation of the performance of various models and instructions across a broad range of multimodal reasoning tasks with vision-text contexts. MM-InstructEval enhances the research on the performance of MLLMs in complex multimodal reasoning tasks, facilitating a more thorough and holistic zero-shot evaluation of MLLMs. We firstly utilize the Best Performance metric to determine the upper performance limit of each model across various datasets. The Mean Relative Gain metric provides an analysis of the overall performance across different models and instructions, while the Stability metric evaluates their sensitivity to variations. Historically, the research has focused on evaluating models independently or solely assessing instructions, overlooking the interplay between models and instructions. To address this gap, we introduce the Adaptability metric, designed to quantify the degree of adaptability between models and instructions. Evaluations are conducted on 31 models (23 MLLMs) across 16 multimodal datasets, covering 6 tasks, with 10 distinct instructions. The extensive analysis enables us to derive novel insights.
Read more5/14/2024