Human Re-ID Meets LVLMs: What can we expect?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.18698v1
• Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 19:00:40 GMT
• Title: Human Re-ID Meets LVLMs: What can we expect?
• Authors: Kailash Hambarde, Pranita Samale, Hugo Proença,
• Abstract summary: We compare the performance of the leading large vision-language models in the human re-identification task. Our results confirm the strengths of LVLMs, but also their severe limitations that often lead to catastrophic answers.
• Score: 14.370360290704197
• License:
• Abstract: Large vision-language models (LVLMs) have been regarded as a breakthrough advance in an astoundingly variety of tasks, from content generation to virtual assistants and multimodal search or retrieval. However, for many of these applications, the performance of these methods has been widely criticized, particularly when compared with state-of-the-art methods and technologies in each specific domain. In this work, we compare the performance of the leading large vision-language models in the human re-identification task, using as baseline the performance attained by state-of-the-art AI models specifically designed for this problem. We compare the results due to ChatGPT-4o, Gemini-2.0-Flash, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Qwen-VL-Max to a baseline ReID PersonViT model, using the well-known Market1501 dataset. Our evaluation pipeline includes the dataset curation, prompt engineering, and metric selection to assess the models' performance. Results are analyzed from many different perspectives: similarity scores, classification accuracy, and classification metrics, including precision, recall, F1 score, and area under curve (AUC). Our results confirm the strengths of LVLMs, but also their severe limitations that often lead to catastrophic answers and should be the scope of further research. As a concluding remark, we speculate about some further research that should fuse traditional and LVLMs to combine the strengths from both families of techniques and achieve solid improvements in performance.

Related papers

• LLM4DS: Evaluating Large Language Models for Data Science Code Generation [0.0]
  This paper empirically assesses the performance of four leading AI assistants-Microsoft Copilot (GPT-4 Turbo), ChatGPT (o1-preview), Claude (3.5 Sonnet) and Perplexity Labs (Llama-3.1-70b-instruct) All models exceeded a 50% success rate, confirming their capability beyond random chance. ChatGPT demonstrated consistent performance across varying difficulty levels, while Claude's success rate fluctuated with task complexity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-16T18:43:26Z)
• LiveXiv -- A Multi-Modal Live Benchmark Based on Arxiv Papers Content [62.816876067499415]
  We propose LiveXiv: a scalable evolving live benchmark based on scientific ArXiv papers. LiveXiv accesses domain-specific manuscripts at any given timestamp and proposes to automatically generate visual question-answer pairs. We benchmark multiple open and proprietary Large Multi-modal Models (LMMs) on the first version of our benchmark, showing its challenging nature and exposing the models true abilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:51:23Z)
• MMIE: Massive Multimodal Interleaved Comprehension Benchmark for Large Vision-Language Models [71.36392373876505]
  We introduce MMIE, a large-scale benchmark for evaluating interleaved multimodal comprehension and generation in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) MMIE comprises 20K meticulously curated multimodal queries, spanning 3 categories, 12 fields, and 102 subfields, including mathematics, coding, physics, literature, health, and arts. It supports both interleaved inputs and outputs, offering a mix of multiple-choice and open-ended question formats to evaluate diverse competencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T04:15:00Z)
• VHELM: A Holistic Evaluation of Vision Language Models [75.88987277686914]
  We present the Holistic Evaluation of Vision Language Models (VHELM) VHELM aggregates various datasets to cover one or more of the 9 aspects: visual perception, knowledge, reasoning, bias, fairness, multilinguality, robustness, toxicity, and safety. Our framework is designed to be lightweight and automatic so that evaluation runs are cheap and fast.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T17:46:34Z)
• Opinion-Unaware Blind Image Quality Assessment using Multi-Scale Deep Feature Statistics [54.08757792080732]
  We propose integrating deep features from pre-trained visual models with a statistical analysis model to achieve opinion-unaware BIQA (OU-BIQA) Our proposed model exhibits superior consistency with human visual perception compared to state-of-the-art BIQA models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T06:09:34Z)
• Multi-Modal Prompt Learning on Blind Image Quality Assessment [65.0676908930946]
  Image Quality Assessment (IQA) models benefit significantly from semantic information, which allows them to treat different types of objects distinctly. Traditional methods, hindered by a lack of sufficiently annotated data, have employed the CLIP image-text pretraining model as their backbone to gain semantic awareness. Recent approaches have attempted to address this mismatch using prompt technology, but these solutions have shortcomings. This paper introduces an innovative multi-modal prompt-based methodology for IQA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-23T11:45:32Z)
• VALOR-EVAL: Holistic Coverage and Faithfulness Evaluation of Large Vision-Language Models [57.43276586087863]
  Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) suffer from hallucination issues, wherein the models generate plausible-sounding but factually incorrect outputs. Existing benchmarks are often limited in scope, focusing mainly on object hallucinations. We introduce a multi-dimensional benchmark covering objects, attributes, and relations, with challenging images selected based on associative biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-22T04:49:22Z)
• Large Language Model Evaluation Via Multi AI Agents: Preliminary results [3.8066447473175304]
  We introduce a novel multi-agent AI model that aims to assess and compare the performance of various Large Language Models (LLMs) Our model consists of eight distinct AI agents, each responsible for retrieving code based on a common description from different advanced language models. We integrate the HumanEval benchmark into our verification agent to assess the generated code's performance, providing insights into their respective capabilities and efficiencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-01T10:06:04Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.