VB: Visibility Benchmark for Visibility and Perspective Reasoning in Images

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.06680v1
• Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2026 23:03:11 GMT
• Title: VB: Visibility Benchmark for Visibility and Perspective Reasoning in Images
• Abstract summary: We present VB, a benchmark that tests whether vision-language models can determine what is and is not visible in a photograph.<n>Items are organized into 100 families using a 2x2 design that crosses a minimal image edit with a minimal text edit.<n>We score models on confidence-aware accuracy with abstention (CAA), minimal-edit flip rate (MEFR), confidence-ranked selective prediction (SelRank), and second-order perspective reasoning.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We present VB, a benchmark that tests whether vision-language models can determine what is and is not visible in a photograph, and abstain when a human viewer cannot reliably answer. Each item pairs a single photo with a short yes/no visibility claim; the model must output VISIBLY_TRUE, VISIBLY_FALSE, or ABSTAIN, together with a confidence score. Items are organized into 100 families using a 2x2 design that crosses a minimal image edit with a minimal text edit, yielding 300 headline evaluation cells. Unlike prior unanswerable-VQA benchmarks, VB tests not only whether a question is unanswerable but why (via reason codes tied to specific visibility factors), and uses controlled minimal edits to verify that model judgments change when and only when the underlying evidence changes. We score models on confidence-aware accuracy with abstention (CAA), minimal-edit flip rate (MEFR), confidence-ranked selective prediction (SelRank), and second-order perspective reasoning (ToMAcc); all headline numbers are computed on the strict XOR subset (three cells per family, 300 scored items per model). We evaluate nine models spanning flagship and prior-generation closed-source systems, and open-source models from 8B to 12B parameters. GPT-4o and Gemini 3.1 Pro effectively tie for the best composite score (0.728 and 0.727), followed by Gemini 2.5 Pro (0.678). The best open-source model, Gemma 3 12B (0.505), surpasses one prior-generation closed-source system. Text-flip robustness exceeds image-flip robustness for six of nine models, and confidence calibration varies substantially: GPT-4o and Gemini 2.5 Pro achieve similar accuracy yet differ sharply in selective prediction quality.

Related papers

• Vision-language models know more about agriculture than they show and rubric-grounded verifications close the gap [3.4891835983047077]
  Vision-language models (VLMs) show promise for agricultural classification, but zero-shot performance on disease, pest, damage, quality, and species identification remains poor.<n>We build a benchmark of 116 datasets, 834 classes, and 8,324 images spanning these tasks to isolate where the gap arises.<n> Linear probing shows VLM vision encoders already encode agricultural features nearly as separable as a self-supervised DINOv3 baseline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-08T20:15:53Z)
• Bigger or Cheaper? Scale and Quantization Effects on Uncertainty Signals in Vision-Language Models Under Image Degradation [0.0]
  We measure, on identical inputs, how model scale and 4-bit quantization affect two confidence signals in the Qwen2-VL family.<n>We find that scale sharply improves the model's internal uncertainty signal.<n>We argue that error-detection AUROC, not calibration error, is the metric that exposes the difference between the two signals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-27T13:47:44Z)
• ConfidenceBench: Evaluating Confidence Calibration in Large Language Models [14.831793255747181]
  ConfidenceBench is a calibration benchmark for large language models.<n>It evaluates verbalized confidence estimates in 15 frontier large language models.<n> Confidence is elicited via prompting, requiring no access to model logits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-10T01:56:30Z)
• Visual Aesthetic Benchmark: Can Frontier Models Judge Beauty? [59.923111838399144]
  We introduce the Visual Aesthetic Benchmark (VAB), which casts aesthetic evaluation as comparative selection over candidate sets with matched subject matter.<n>VAB contains 400 tasks and 1,195 images across fine art, photography, and illustration, with labels derived from the consensus of 10 independent expert judges per task.<n>We find that the strongest system identifies both the best and the worst image correctly across three random permutations of the candidate order in only 26.5% of tasks, far below the 68.9% achieved by human experts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-12T19:33:28Z)
• What Single-Prompt Accuracy Misses: A Multi-Variant Reliability Audit of Language Models [0.0]
  Single-prompt accuracy is the dominant way to benchmark language models, but it can miss reliability failures that matter.<n>We evaluate a 15-model open-weight corpus, with the main reliability analyses focused on 10 instruct models across five classification and reasoning benchmarks.<n>We find three broad results. First, evaluation design can materially change the conclusion.<n>Second, confidence signals are fragile. On MMLU-Pro, every primary model verbally reports confidence substantially above both its accuracy and its token-probability confidence on the same rows, and verbal parse rate can collapse for a single model on a single prompt variant.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-03T20:05:08Z)
• SpatialBench-UC: Uncertainty-Aware Evaluation of Spatial Prompt Following in Text-to-Image Generation [0.0]
  SpatialBench-UC is a small, reproducible benchmark for pairwise spatial relations.<n>We release a benchmark package, versioned prompts, pinned configs, per-sample checker outputs, and report tables.<n>We evaluate three baselines, Stable Diffusion 1.5, SD 1.5 BoxDiff, and SD 1.4 GLIGEN.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-19T23:37:10Z)
• Multimodal RewardBench 2: Evaluating Omni Reward Models for Interleaved Text and Image [58.14192385042352]
  We introduce Multimodal RewardBench 2 (MMRB2), the first benchmark for reward models on multimodal understanding and (interleaved) generation.<n>MMRB2 spans four tasks: text-to-image, image editing, interleaved generation, and multimodal reasoning.<n>It provides 1,000 expert-annotated preference pairs per task from 23 models and agents across 21 source tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-18T18:56:04Z)
• ObjexMT: Objective Extraction and Metacognitive Calibration for LLM-as-a-Judge under Multi-Turn Jailbreaks [12.396822247035578]
  We present exMT, a benchmark for objective extraction and metacognition.<n>Given a multi-turn transcript, a model must output a one-sentence base objective and a self-reported confidence.<n> Accuracy is scored by similarity to gold objectives, then thresholded once on 300 calibration items.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-23T03:32:04Z)
• Goedel-Prover-V2: Scaling Formal Theorem Proving with Scaffolded Data Synthesis and Self-Correction [95.91743732150233]
  Goedel-Prover-V2, a series of open-source language models, set a new state-of-the-art in automated theorem proving.<n>We generate synthetic tasks of increasing difficulty to train the model to master increasingly complex theorems.<n>Goedel-Prover-V2-32B achieves 88.1% on MiniF2F at pass@32 in standard mode and 90.4% in self-correction mode.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-05T16:28:22Z)
• FLIP Reasoning Challenge [20.706469085872516]
  This paper introduces the FLIP dataset, a benchmark for evaluating AI reasoning capabilities based on human verification tasks.<n>FLIP challenges present users with two orderings of 4 images, requiring them to identify the coherent one.<n>Our experiments evaluate state-of-the-art models, leveraging both vision-language models (VLMs) and large language models (LLMs)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-16T17:07:16Z)
• Visual Reasoning Evaluation of Grok, Deepseek Janus, Gemini, Qwen, Mistral, and ChatGPT [0.0]
  This study introduces a novel benchmark that integrates multi-image reasoning tasks with rejection-based evaluation and positional bias detection.<n>We applied this benchmark to assess Grok 3, ChatGPT-4o, ChatGPT-o1, Gemini 2.0 Flash Experimental, DeepSeek Janus models, Qwen2.5-VL-72B-Instruct, QVQ-72B-Preview, and Pixtral 12B.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-23T04:01:43Z)
• S*: Test Time Scaling for Code Generation [55.11863577956177]
  We propose S*, the first hybrid test-time scaling framework for code generation.<n>S* substantially improves the coverage and selection accuracy of generated code.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T09:18:53Z)
• Conservative Prediction via Data-Driven Confidence Minimization [70.93946578046003]
  In safety-critical applications of machine learning, it is often desirable for a model to be conservative. We propose the Data-Driven Confidence Minimization framework, which minimizes confidence on an uncertainty dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T07:05:36Z)
• Zero-shot Model Diagnosis [80.36063332820568]
  A common approach to evaluate deep learning models is to build a labeled test set with attributes of interest and assess how well it performs. This paper argues the case that Zero-shot Model Diagnosis (ZOOM) is possible without the need for a test set nor labeling.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-27T17:59:33Z)
• Improving Zero-shot Generalization and Robustness of Multi-modal Models [70.14692320804178]
  Multi-modal image-text models such as CLIP and LiT have demonstrated impressive performance on image classification benchmarks. We investigate the reasons for this performance gap and find that many of the failure cases are caused by ambiguity in the text prompts. We propose a simple and efficient way to improve accuracy on such uncertain images by making use of the WordNet hierarchy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-04T07:26:24Z)
• One Eye is All You Need: Lightweight Ensembles for Gaze Estimation with Single Encoders [0.0]
  We propose a gaze estimation model that implements the ResNet and Inception model architectures and makes predictions using only one eye image. With the use of lightweight architectures, we achieve high performance on the GazeCapture dataset with very low model parameter counts. We also notice significantly lower errors on the right eye images in the test set, which could be important in the design of future gaze estimation-based tools.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-22T01:12:31Z)

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.