Seiji Gobara

Seiji Gobara, Hidetaka Kamigaito, Taro Watanabe

Education that suits the individual learning level is necessary to improve students' understanding. The first step in achieving this purpose by using large language models (LLMs) is to adjust the textual difficulty of the response to students. This work analyzes how LLMs can implicitly adjust text difficulty between user input and its generated text. To conduct the experiments, we created a new dataset from Stack-Overflow to explore the performance of question-answering-based conversation. Experimental results on the Stack-Overflow dataset and the TSCC dataset, including multi-turn conversation show that LLMs can implicitly handle text difficulty between user input and its generated response. We also observed that some LLMs can surpass humans in handling text difficulty and the importance of instruction-tuning.

Kazuki Hayashi, Kazuma Onishi, Toma Suzuki et al.

Large-scale Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) process both images and text, excelling in multimodal tasks such as image captioning and description generation. However, while these models excel at generating factual content, their ability to generate and evaluate texts reflecting perspectives on the same image, depending on the context, has not been sufficiently explored. To address this, we propose IRR: Image Review Rank, a novel evaluation framework designed to assess critic review texts from multiple perspectives. IRR evaluates LVLMs by measuring how closely their judgments align with human interpretations. We validate it using a dataset of images from 15 categories, each with five critic review texts and annotated rankings in both English and Japanese, totaling over 2,000 data instances. The datasets are available at https://hf.co/datasets/naist-nlp/Wiki-ImageReview1.0. Our results indicate that, although LVLMs exhibited consistent performance across languages, their correlation with human annotations was insufficient, highlighting the need for further advancements. These findings highlight the limitations of current evaluation methods and the need for approaches that better capture human reasoning in Vision & Language tasks.