arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
​通知:联邦节假日调休:哥伦布日 / 原住民日(Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples' Day),今日(13日)无更新。
arXiv 2410.14669cs.CVcs.CL

NaturalBench:在自然对抗样本上评估视觉-语言模型

NaturalBench: Evaluating Vision-Language Models on Natural Adversarial Samples

Carnegie Mellon University(卡内基梅隆大学);University of Washington(华盛顿大学)

Baiqi Li, Zhiqiu Lin, Wenxuan Peng, Jean de Dieu Nyandwi, Daniel Jiang, Zixian Ma, Simran Khanuja, Ranjay Krishna, Graham Neubig, Deva Ramanan

AI总结:

本文提出NaturalBench基准,通过同一问题配对两幅答案不同的自然图像构造10,000个人工验证VQA样本,评估53个VLM并揭示其显著性能差距、组合性挑战与偏差。

摘要:

视觉-语言模型(VLM)在近年来评估复杂视觉-语言推理的视觉问答(VQA)基准上取得了显著进展。然而,这些模型真的有效吗?在本工作中,我们表明,VLM在人类能够轻松回答的自然图像和问题上仍然表现困难,我们将其称为自然对抗样本。我们还发现,令人惊讶的是,使用CLIP和ChatGPT等现成模型,很容易从自然图像-文本语料库中生成这些VQA样本。我们提出一种半自动方法,以收集一个包含10,000个经人工验证的VQA样本的新基准NaturalBench,用于可靠评估VLM。关键在于,我们采用以视觉为中心的设计,将每个问题与两幅产生不同答案的图像配对,从而防止盲解方案在不使用图像的情况下作答。这使得NaturalBench比以往那些可凭借常识先验解决的基准更具挑战性。我们在NaturalBench上评估了53个最先进的VLM,结果显示,LLaVA-OneVision、Cambrian-1、Llama3.2-Vision、Molmo、Qwen2-VL,甚至GPT-4o等模型都落后人类表现(超过90%)50%-70%。我们从两个角度分析NaturalBench为何困难:(1)组合性:解决NaturalBench需要多样的视觉-语言技能,包括理解属性绑定、对象关系,以及逻辑和计数等高级推理。为此,不同于以往工作为每个样本使用单一标签,我们为每个NaturalBench样本标注1到8个技能标签,以进行细粒度评估。(2)偏差:NaturalBench揭示了VLM中严重的偏差,因为模型往往无论图像如何都选择相同答案。最后,我们将基准构建方法应用于多种数据源,包括长描述(超过100个词)以及中文和印地语等非英语语言,突显了其用于VLM动态评估的潜力。

英文摘要:

Vision-language models (VLMs) have made significant progress in recent visual-question-answering (VQA) benchmarks that evaluate complex visio-linguistic reasoning. However, are these models truly effective? In this work, we show that VLMs still struggle with natural images and questions that humans can easily answer, which we term natural adversarial samples. We also find it surprisingly easy to generate these VQA samples from natural image-text corpora using off-the-shelf models like CLIP and ChatGPT. We propose a semi-automated approach to collect a new benchmark, NaturalBench, for reliably evaluating VLMs with 10,000 human-verified VQA samples. Crucially, we adopt a $\textbf{vision-centric}$ design by pairing each question with two images that yield different answers, preventing blind solutions from answering without using the images. This makes NaturalBench more challenging than previous benchmarks that can be solved with commonsense priors. We evaluate 53 state-of-the-art VLMs on NaturalBench, showing that models like LLaVA-OneVision, Cambrian-1, Llama3.2-Vision, Molmo, Qwen2-VL, and even GPT-4o lag 50%-70% behind human performance (over 90%). We analyze why NaturalBench is hard from two angles: (1) Compositionality: Solving NaturalBench requires diverse visio-linguistic skills, including understanding attribute bindings, object relationships, and advanced reasoning like logic and counting. To this end, unlike prior work that uses a single tag per sample, we tag each NaturalBench sample with 1 to 8 skill tags for fine-grained evaluation. (2) Biases: NaturalBench exposes severe biases in VLMs, as models often choose the same answer regardless of the image. Lastly, we apply our benchmark curation method to diverse data sources, including long captions (over 100 words) and non-English languages like Chinese and Hindi, highlighting its potential for dynamic evaluations of VLMs.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑