Papers › Multimodal RewardBench: Holistic Evaluation of Reward Models for Vision Language Models

Multimodal RewardBench: Holistic Evaluation of Reward Models for Vision Language Models

20 Feb 2025arXiv:2502.14191archive 2025-07-28

Michihiro Yasunaga, Luke Zettlemoyer, Marjan Ghazvininejad

Reward models play an essential role in training vision-language models (VLMs) by assessing output quality to enable aligning with human preferences. Despite their importance, the research community lacks comprehensive open benchmarks for evaluating multimodal reward models in VLMs. To address this gap, we introduce Multimodal RewardBench, an expert-annotated benchmark covering six domains: general correctness, preference, knowledge, reasoning, safety, and visual question-answering. Our dataset comprises 5,211 annotated (prompt, chosen response, rejected response) triplets collected from various VLMs. In evaluating a range of VLM judges, we find that even the top-performing models, Gemini 1.5 Pro and Claude 3.5 Sonnet, achieve only 72% overall accuracy. Notably, most models struggle in the reasoning and safety domains. These findings suggest that Multimodal RewardBench offers a challenging testbed for advancing reward model development across multiple domains. We release the benchmark at https://github.com/facebookresearch/multimodal_rewardbench.

PaperPDFCode

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

Code

facebookresearch/multimodal_rewardbench officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubNOASSERTION 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

Question AnsweringVisual Question Answering

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