Abstract:The rapid evolution of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) has highlighted the necessity for comprehensive evaluation frameworks that assess these models across diverse dimensions. While existing benchmarks focus on specific aspects such as perceptual abilities, cognitive capabilities, and safety against adversarial attacks, they often lack the breadth and depth required to provide a holistic understanding of LVLMs' strengths and limitations. To address this gap, we introduce REVAL, a comprehensive benchmark designed to evaluate the \textbf{RE}liability and \textbf{VAL}ue of LVLMs. REVAL encompasses over 144K image-text Visual Question Answering (VQA) samples, structured into two primary sections: Reliability, which assesses truthfulness (\eg, perceptual accuracy and hallucination tendencies) and robustness (\eg, resilience to adversarial attacks, typographic attacks, and image corruption), and Values, which evaluates ethical concerns (\eg, bias and moral understanding), safety issues (\eg, toxicity and jailbreak vulnerabilities), and privacy problems (\eg, privacy awareness and privacy leakage). We evaluate 26 models, including mainstream open-source LVLMs and prominent closed-source models like GPT-4o and Gemini-1.5-Pro. Our findings reveal that while current LVLMs excel in perceptual tasks and toxicity avoidance, they exhibit significant vulnerabilities in adversarial scenarios, privacy preservation, and ethical reasoning. These insights underscore critical areas for future improvements, guiding the development of more secure, reliable, and ethically aligned LVLMs. REVAL provides a robust framework for researchers to systematically assess and compare LVLMs, fostering advancements in the field.
Abstract:Recently, large foundation models, including large language models (LLMs) and large vision-language models (LVLMs), have become essential tools in critical fields such as law, finance, and healthcare. As these models increasingly integrate into our daily life, it is necessary to conduct moral evaluation to ensure that their outputs align with human values and remain within moral boundaries. Previous works primarily focus on LLMs, proposing moral datasets and benchmarks limited to text modality. However, given the rapid development of LVLMs, there is still a lack of multimodal moral evaluation methods. To bridge this gap, we introduce M$^3$oralBench, the first MultiModal Moral Benchmark for LVLMs. M$^3$oralBench expands the everyday moral scenarios in Moral Foundations Vignettes (MFVs) and employs the text-to-image diffusion model, SD3.0, to create corresponding scenario images. It conducts moral evaluation across six moral foundations of Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) and encompasses tasks in moral judgement, moral classification, and moral response, providing a comprehensive assessment of model performance in multimodal moral understanding and reasoning. Extensive experiments on 10 popular open-source and closed-source LVLMs demonstrate that M$^3$oralBench is a challenging benchmark, exposing notable moral limitations in current models. Our benchmark is publicly available.
Abstract:Currently many benchmarks have been proposed to evaluate the perception ability of the Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs). However, most benchmarks conduct questions by selecting images from existing datasets, resulting in the potential data leakage. Besides, these benchmarks merely focus on evaluating LVLMs on the realistic style images and clean scenarios, leaving the multi-stylized images and noisy scenarios unexplored. In response to these challenges, we propose a dynamic and scalable benchmark named Dysca for evaluating LVLMs by leveraging synthesis images. Specifically, we leverage Stable Diffusion and design a rule-based method to dynamically generate novel images, questions and the corresponding answers. We consider 51 kinds of image styles and evaluate the perception capability in 20 subtasks. Moreover, we conduct evaluations under 4 scenarios (i.e., Clean, Corruption, Print Attacking and Adversarial Attacking) and 3 question types (i.e., Multi-choices, True-or-false and Free-form). Thanks to the generative paradigm, Dysca serves as a scalable benchmark for easily adding new subtasks and scenarios. A total of 8 advanced open-source LVLMs with 10 checkpoints are evaluated on Dysca, revealing the drawbacks of current LVLMs. The benchmark is released in \url{https://github.com/Benchmark-Dysca/Dysca}.
Abstract:Despite the rapid progress and outstanding performance of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) in recent years, LVLMs have been plagued by the issue of hallucination, i.e., LVLMs tend to generate responses that are inconsistent with the corresponding visual inputs. To evaluate the degree of hallucination in LVLMs, previous works have proposed a series of benchmarks featuring different types of tasks and evaluation metrics. However, we find that the quality of the existing hallucination benchmarks varies, with some suffering from problems, e.g., inconsistent evaluation results under repeated tests, and misalignment with human evaluation. To this end, we propose a Hallucination benchmark Quality Measurement framework (HQM), which leverages various indicators to assess the reliability and validity of existing hallucination benchmarks separately. Specifically, for reliability we explore test-retest reliability and parallel-forms reliability, while for validity we examine criterion validity and coverage of hallucination types. Furthermore, based on the results of our quality measurement, we construct a High-Quality Hallucination Benchmark (HQH) for LVLMs. We conduct an extensive evaluation of over 10 representative LVLMs, including GPT-4o and Gemini-Vision-Pro, to provide an in-depth analysis of the hallucination issues in existing models. Our benchmark is publicly available at https://github.com/HQHBench/HQHBench.