arXiv Computer Vision
VIABLE: A Visually Impaired Assistance Benchmark for VLM-as-a-Judge Evaluation
Read the original on arXiv Computer Vision →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computer Vision.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Jul 28
Are Prompt Optimizers Blind? Cross-Modal Visual Feedback for Automatic Prompt Optimization
arXiv:2607. 24354v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Automatic prompt optimization (APO) has been widely adopted to adapt vision-language models (VLMs) to downstream tasks without weight updates, yielding promising results.
arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 21
Answer-Level Trust Selection for Physical Vision-Language Reasoning
arXiv:2608. 19807v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) can estimate physical quantities such as duration, speed, and acceleration from visual observations, but existing benchmarks primarily assess overall model performance against annotated ground truth.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 12
3D-DefectBench: A Controlled Factorial Study of Vision-Language Model Evaluation Pipelines for Fine-Grained 3D Generation Defects
Automated evaluation is essential for scaling generative 3D systems, where exhaustive human review is costly and slow. However, the reliability of an automated judge depends on the entire evaluation pipeline, not only the underlying vision-language model (VLM), but also how assets are rendered, what visual evidence is provided, how the task is specified, and how human reference labels are constructed.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 18
A Cross-Model VLM-Judge Protocol for Single-Image 3D Mesh Quality (and Why Cheap Proxies Fall Short)
arXiv:2606. 18451v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Single-image-to-3D generators are improving quickly, but there is no agreed, human-free way to tell whether one generated mesh is better than another.
arXiv AI
Aug 14
How Do VLMs Behave When Blind or Misled? Behavioral Evaluation of VLMs on Scientific Figures
arXiv:2608. 13267v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Existing vision-language model (VLM) benchmarks emphasize perception and reasoning accuracy (how well VLMs describe and reason about what they see in an image), with limited attention to behavioral reliability under uncertainty (how they behave when visual evidence is missing or misleading).
arXiv AI
Aug 26
Beyond Accuracy: A Dual-Judge Evaluation Protocol for Vision-Language Models in Legally Grounded Tasks
The paper introduces a dual‑judge evaluation protocol for vision‑language models in legally grounded tasks, pairing a 0‑10 quality judge with a strict binary semantic‑equivalence judge. Using a controlled UK traffic‑sign interpretation task, the authors analyze 4,680 evaluations across visibility and occlusion conditions, finding moderate association between judges and an asymmetric Type II error pattern that is most pronounced under heavy occlusion. The protocol requires only one additional LLM call and reveals quality‑trustworthiness signals that single‑judge methods miss.