Papers › What Are We Measuring When We Evaluate Large Vision-Language Models? An Analysis of...

What Are We Measuring When We Evaluate Large Vision-Language Models? An Analysis of Latent Factors and Biases

3 Apr 2024arXiv:2404.02415archive 2025-07-28

Anthony Meng Huat Tiong, Junqi Zhao, Boyang Li, Junnan Li, Steven C. H. Hoi, Caiming Xiong

Vision-language (VL) models, pretrained on colossal image-text datasets, have attained broad VL competence that is difficult to evaluate. A common belief is that a small number of VL skills underlie the variety of VL tests. In this paper, we perform a large-scale transfer learning experiment aimed at discovering latent VL skills from data. We reveal interesting characteristics that have important implications for test suite design. First, generation tasks suffer from a length bias, suggesting benchmarks should balance tasks with varying output lengths. Second, we demonstrate that factor analysis successfully identifies reasonable yet surprising VL skill factors, suggesting benchmarks could leverage similar analyses for task selection. Finally, we present a new dataset, OLIVE (https://github.com/jq-zh/olive-dataset), which simulates user instructions in the wild and presents challenges dissimilar to all datasets we tested. Our findings contribute to the design of balanced and broad-coverage vision-language evaluation methods.

PaperPDFCode

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

Code

jq-zh/olive-dataset officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubMIT 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

Transfer Learning

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