arXiv:2607. 15216v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) often introduce errors when generating image captions, resulting in misaligned image-text pairs.
arXiv:2602. 07026v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Despite the success of multimodal contrastive learning in aligning visual and linguistic representations, a persistent geometric anomaly, the Modality Gap, remains: embeddings of distinct modalities expressing identical semantics occupy systematically offset regions.
arXiv:2511. 01390v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Fine-grained cross-modal alignment aims to establish precise local correspondences between vision and language, forming a cornerstone for visual question answering and related multimodal applications.
The paper introduces Redemption Score (RS), a multi‑modal evaluation framework for image captioning that combines three complementary signals: Mutual Information Divergence for global image‑text alignment, DINO‑based perceptual similarity of cycle‑generated images for visual grounding, and LLM text embeddings for contextual similarity to human references. RS fuses these signals to provide a more holistic assessment, achieving a Kendall‑τ of 58.42 on Flickr8k and outperforming most prior methods. The framework demonstrates consistent performance across Conceptual Captions and MS COCO, offering a robust evaluation that captures both visual accuracy and text quality.
Intelligent systems that act in the world require image understanding that is both comprehensive and spatially grounded. Current vision-language models (VLMs) can generate fluent and detailed image ca...
arXiv:2606.29997v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Automatic evaluation of image and video captioning is essential for benchmarking multimodal systems, although standard evaluation metrics show limi...
SVG-Score introduces a human‑aligned evaluation framework for text‑to‑SVG generation, addressing the shortcomings of existing image‑based metrics like CLIPScore that poorly capture SVG‑specific errors such as color, count, and spatial inaccuracies. The authors first demonstrate that CLIP‑based scores are largely insensitive to these errors and that generic Vision‑Language Models respond inconsistently across error types and styles. They then present a human‑annotated Semantic Alignment dataset and develop two complementary evaluators: a CLIP‑based scorer adapted to vector graphics and a VLM judge refined through supervised fine‑tuning and reward‑shaped reinforcement learning, enabling both fast large‑scale and expressive, interpretable assessment of SVG generators.
Automatic evaluation of image and video captioning is essential for benchmarking multimodal systems, although standard evaluation metrics show limited alignment with human judgments. Recent approaches using large language models (LLMs), commonly referred to as LLM-as-a-Judge, have improved alignment with human judgments but still suffer from a mismatch between large-vocabulary language modeling and evaluation over a small label set.
arXiv:2609.06245v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) perform strongly on general visual understanding tasks such as visual question answering, yet they often str...
arXiv:2605. 18160v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: In recent years, multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have achieved remarkable progress, primarily attributed to effective paradigms for integrating visual and textual information.
arXiv:2609.36628v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-Language Models (VLMs) can generate rich video captions, yet often misidentify which person performs an action or which limb is involved, partic...
arXiv:2605. 08245v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-Language Models (VLMs) increasingly power high-stakes applications, from medical imaging to autonomous systems, yet they routinely hallucinate, confidently describing content not present in the input.
UReason is a benchmark that evaluates how well unified multimodal models (UMMs) align textual reasoning with image generation. It contains 2,000 human‑curated instances across five reasoning‑intensive tasks—Code, Arithmetic, Spatial, Attribute, and Text—and compares direct generation, reasoning‑guided generation, and decontextualized generation. The study finds that while reasoning‑guided generation improves over direct generation, decontextualized generation consistently outperforms it, indicating that the visual semantics in textual reasoning are not reliably reflected in the generated images.