Papers › RoViST:Learning Robust Metrics for Visual Storytelling

RoViST:Learning Robust Metrics for Visual Storytelling

8 May 2022arXiv:2205.03774archive 2025-07-28

Eileen Wang, Caren Han, Josiah Poon

Visual storytelling (VST) is the task of generating a story paragraph that describes a given image sequence. Most existing storytelling approaches have evaluated their models using traditional natural language generation metrics like BLEU or CIDEr. However, such metrics based on n-gram matching tend to have poor correlation with human evaluation scores and do not explicitly consider other criteria necessary for storytelling such as sentence structure or topic coherence. Moreover, a single score is not enough to assess a story as it does not inform us about what specific errors were made by the model. In this paper, we propose 3 evaluation metrics sets that analyses which aspects we would look for in a good story: 1) visual grounding, 2) coherence, and 3) non-redundancy. We measure the reliability of our metric sets by analysing its correlation with human judgement scores on a sample of machine stories obtained from 4 state-of-the-arts models trained on the Visual Storytelling Dataset (VIST). Our metric sets outperforms other metrics on human correlation, and could be served as a learning based evaluation metric set that is complementary to existing rule-based metrics.

PaperPDFCode

Code

usydnlp/rovist officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubpytorch 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

SentenceText GenerationVisual GroundingVisual Storytelling

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