Papers › Information Density Principle for MLLM Benchmarks

Information Density Principle for MLLM Benchmarks

13 Mar 2025arXiv:2503.10079archive 2025-07-28

Chunyi Li, Xiaozhe Li, ZiCheng Zhang, Yuan Tian, Ziheng Jia, Xiaohong Liu, Xiongkuo Min, Jia Wang, Haodong Duan, Kai Chen, Guangtao Zhai

With the emergence of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs), hundreds of benchmarks have been developed to ensure the reliability of MLLMs in downstream tasks. However, the evaluation mechanism itself may not be reliable. For developers of MLLMs, questions remain about which benchmark to use and whether the test results meet their requirements. Therefore, we propose a critical principle of Information Density, which examines how much insight a benchmark can provide for the development of MLLMs. We characterize it from four key dimensions: (1) Fallacy, (2) Difficulty, (3) Redundancy, (4) Diversity. Through a comprehensive analysis of more than 10,000 samples, we measured the information density of 19 MLLM benchmarks. Experiments show that using the latest benchmarks in testing can provide more insight compared to previous ones, but there is still room for improvement in their information density. We hope this principle can promote the development and application of future MLLM benchmarks. Project page: https://github.com/lcysyzxdxc/bench4bench

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

lcysyzxdxc/bench4bench officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHub report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Diversity

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections