Farong Wen

WenZhe Li, Qihang Yan, Liang Chen et al.

Scientific images function as critical evidence in research communication, yet their integrity faces unprecedented threats from AI-generated content that introduces subtle but consequential errors. Existing evaluation paradigms prove inadequate: perceptual quality metrics poorly correlate with scientific validity, while language models lack domain-specific verification capabilities. To address this gap, we propose the \textbf{S}cientific \textbf{I}mage \textbf{U}tility and \textbf{U}pgradability \textbf{A}ssessment (\textbf{SIU$^2$A}) framework, which introduces two complementary dimensions for scientific image evaluation. \textbf{Utility} encompasses \textit{error detection} (identifying scientific inaccuracies) and \textit{correction feasibility} (assessing whether errors can be reliably repaired). \textbf{Upgradability} measures the quality of correction. We categorize scientific image corruption into four fundamental types: Detail Distortion, Incompleteness, False Content, and Entity Confusion. Based on this taxonomy, we construct SIU$^2$A-Benchmark, a dataset with expert annotations for error identification and repair. The framework implements a two-stage evaluation protocol: the \textit{Utility} stage evaluates error detection capability and repair instruction generation, while the \textit{Upgradability} stage assesses whether corrections faithfully restore scientific validity without compromising existing accurate information. Experiments reveal that current multimodal systems exhibit significant limitations in both scientific error assessment and faithful correction, exposing a fundamental gap between visual perception and scientific usability.

Yingjie Zhou, Zicheng Zhang, Farong Wen et al.

Although 3D generated content (3DGC) offers advantages in reducing production costs and accelerating design timelines, its quality often falls short when compared to 3D professionally generated content. Common quality issues frequently affect 3DGC, highlighting the importance of timely and effective quality assessment. Such evaluations not only ensure a higher standard of 3DGCs for end-users but also provide critical insights for advancing generative technologies. To address existing gaps in this domain, this paper introduces a novel 3DGC quality assessment dataset, 3DGCQA, built using 7 representative Text-to-3D generation methods. During the dataset's construction, 50 fixed prompts are utilized to generate contents across all methods, resulting in the creation of 313 textured meshes that constitute the 3DGCQA dataset. The visualization intuitively reveals the presence of 6 common distortion categories in the generated 3DGCs. To further explore the quality of the 3DGCs, subjective quality assessment is conducted by evaluators, whose ratings reveal significant variation in quality across different generation methods. Additionally, several objective quality assessment algorithms are tested on the 3DGCQA dataset. The results expose limitations in the performance of existing algorithms and underscore the need for developing more specialized quality assessment methods. To provide a valuable resource for future research and development in 3D content generation and quality assessment, the dataset has been open-sourced in https://github.com/zyj-2000/3DGCQA.

Yingjie Zhou, Xilei Zhu, Siyu Ren et al.

Speech-driven Talking Human (TH) generation, commonly known as "Talker," currently faces limitations in multi-subject driving capabilities. Extending this paradigm to "Multi-Talker," capable of animating multiple subjects simultaneously, introduces richer interactivity and stronger immersion in audiovisual communication. However, current Multi-Talkers still exhibit noticeable quality degradation caused by technical limitations, resulting in suboptimal user experiences. To address this challenge, we construct THQA-MT, the first large-scale Multi-Talker-generated Talking Human Quality Assessment dataset, consisting of 5,492 Multi-Talker-generated THs (MTHs) from 15 representative Multi-Talkers using 400 real portraits collected online. Through subjective experiments, we analyze perceptual discrepancies among different Multi-Talkers and identify 12 common types of distortion. Furthermore, we introduce EvalTalker, a novel TH quality assessment framework. This framework possesses the ability to perceive global quality, human characteristics, and identity consistency, while integrating Qwen-Sync to perceive multimodal synchrony. Experimental results demonstrate that EvalTalker achieves superior correlation with subjective scores, providing a robust foundation for future research on high-quality Multi-Talker generation and evaluation.

Xinyu Fang, Zhijian Chen, Kai Lan et al. · pku

Creativity is a fundamental aspect of intelligence, involving the ability to generate novel and appropriate solutions across diverse contexts. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have been extensively evaluated for their creative capabilities, the assessment of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) in this domain remains largely unexplored. To address this gap, we introduce Creation-MMBench, a multimodal benchmark specifically designed to evaluate the creative capabilities of MLLMs in real-world, image-based tasks. The benchmark comprises 765 test cases spanning 51 fine-grained tasks. To ensure rigorous evaluation, we define instance-specific evaluation criteria for each test case, guiding the assessment of both general response quality and factual consistency with visual inputs. Experimental results reveal that current open-source MLLMs significantly underperform compared to proprietary models in creative tasks. Furthermore, our analysis demonstrates that visual fine-tuning can negatively impact the base LLM's creative abilities. Creation-MMBench provides valuable insights for advancing MLLM creativity and establishes a foundation for future improvements in multimodal generative intelligence. Full data and evaluation code is released on https://github.com/open-compass/Creation-MMBench.

Yijin Guo, Kaiyuan Ji, Xiaorong Zhu et al.

Currently, nearly all evaluations of foundation models focus on objective metrics, emphasizing quiz performance to define model capabilities. While this model-centric approach enables rapid performance assessment, it fails to reflect authentic human experiences. To address this gap, we propose a Human-Centric subjective Evaluation (HCE) framework, focusing on three core dimensions: problem-solving ability, information quality, and interaction experience. Through experiments involving Deepseek R1, OpenAI o3 mini, Grok 3, and Gemini 2.5, we conduct over 540 participant-driven evaluations, where humans and models collaborate on open-ended research tasks, yielding a comprehensive subjective dataset. This dataset captures diverse user feedback across multiple disciplines, revealing distinct model strengths and adaptability. Our findings highlight Grok 3's superior performance, followed by Deepseek R1 and Gemini 2.5, with OpenAI o3 mini lagging behind. By offering a novel framework and a rich dataset, this study not only enhances subjective evaluation methodologies but also lays the foundation for standardized, automated assessments, advancing LLM development for research and practical scenarios. Our dataset link is https://github.com/yijinguo/Human-Centric-Evaluation.

Junying Wang, Zicheng Zhang, Yijin Guo et al.

As foundation models grow rapidly in capability and deployment, evaluating their scientific understanding becomes increasingly critical. Existing science benchmarks have made progress towards broad Range, wide Reach, and high Rigor, yet they often face two major challenges: data leakage risks that compromise benchmarking validity, and evaluation inefficiency due to large-scale testing. To address these issues, we introduce the Ever-Evolving Science Exam (EESE), a dynamic benchmark designed to reliably assess scientific capabilities in foundation models. Our approach consists of two components: 1) a non-public EESE-Pool with over 100K expertly constructed science instances (question-answer pairs) across 5 disciplines and 500+ subfields, built through a multi-stage pipeline ensuring Range, Reach, and Rigor, 2) a periodically updated 500-instance subset EESE, sampled and validated to enable leakage-resilient, low-overhead evaluations. Experiments on 32 open- and closed-source models demonstrate that EESE effectively differentiates the strengths and weaknesses of models in scientific fields and cognitive dimensions. Overall, EESE provides a robust, scalable, and forward-compatible solution for science benchmark design, offering a realistic measure of how well foundation models handle science questions. The project page is at: https://github.com/aiben-ch/EESE.

Yingjie Zhou, Jiezhang Cao, Zicheng Zhang et al.

Speech-driven methods for portraits are figuratively known as "Talkers" because of their capability to synthesize speaking mouth shapes and facial movements. Especially with the rapid development of the Text-to-Image (T2I) models, AI-Generated Talking Heads (AGTHs) have gradually become an emerging digital human media. However, challenges persist regarding the quality of these talkers and AGTHs they generate, and comprehensive studies addressing these issues remain limited. To address this gap, this paper presents the largest AGTH quality assessment dataset THQA-10K to date, which selects 12 prominent T2I models and 14 advanced talkers to generate AGTHs for 14 prompts. After excluding instances where AGTH generation is unsuccessful, the THQA-10K dataset contains 10,457 AGTHs. Then, volunteers are recruited to subjectively rate the AGTHs and give the corresponding distortion categories. In our analysis for subjective experimental results, we evaluate the performance of talkers in terms of generalizability and quality, and also expose the distortions of existing AGTHs. Finally, an objective quality assessment method based on the first frame, Y-T slice and tone-lip consistency is proposed. Experimental results show that this method can achieve state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance in AGTH quality assessment. The work is released at https://github.com/zyj-2000/Talker.

Chunyi Li, Jiaohao Xiao, Jianbo Zhang et al.

Embodied AI has developed rapidly in recent years, but it is still mainly deployed in laboratories, with various distortions in the Real-world limiting its application. Traditionally, Image Quality Assessment (IQA) methods are applied to predict human preferences for distorted images; however, there is no IQA method to assess the usability of an image in embodied tasks, namely, the perceptual quality for robots. To provide accurate and reliable quality indicators for future embodied scenarios, we first propose the topic: IQA for Embodied AI. Specifically, we (1) based on the Mertonian system and meta-cognitive theory, constructed a perception-cognition-decision-execution pipeline and defined a comprehensive subjective score collection process; (2) established the Embodied-IQA database, containing over 36k reference/distorted image pairs, with more than 5m fine-grained annotations provided by Vision Language Models/Vision Language Action-models/Real-world robots; (3) trained and validated the performance of mainstream IQA methods on Embodied-IQA, demonstrating the need to develop more accurate quality indicators for Embodied AI. We sincerely hope that through evaluation, we can promote the application of Embodied AI under complex distortions in the Real-world. Project page: https://github.com/lcysyzxdxc/EmbodiedIQA

Xiaohong Liu, Xiongkuo Min, Qiang Hu et al.

This paper reports on the NTIRE 2025 XGC Quality Assessment Challenge, which will be held in conjunction with the New Trends in Image Restoration and Enhancement Workshop (NTIRE) at CVPR 2025. This challenge is to address a major challenge in the field of video and talking head processing. The challenge is divided into three tracks, including user generated video, AI generated video and talking head. The user-generated video track uses the FineVD-GC, which contains 6,284 user generated videos. The user-generated video track has a total of 125 registered participants. A total of 242 submissions are received in the development phase, and 136 submissions are received in the test phase. Finally, 5 participating teams submitted their models and fact sheets. The AI generated video track uses the Q-Eval-Video, which contains 34,029 AI-Generated Videos (AIGVs) generated by 11 popular Text-to-Video (T2V) models. A total of 133 participants have registered in this track. A total of 396 submissions are received in the development phase, and 226 submissions are received in the test phase. Finally, 6 participating teams submitted their models and fact sheets. The talking head track uses the THQA-NTIRE, which contains 12,247 2D and 3D talking heads. A total of 89 participants have registered in this track. A total of 225 submissions are received in the development phase, and 118 submissions are received in the test phase. Finally, 8 participating teams submitted their models and fact sheets. Each participating team in every track has proposed a method that outperforms the baseline, which has contributed to the development of fields in three tracks.

Yingjie Zhou, Zicheng Zhang, Jiezhang Cao et al.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has demonstrated significant capabilities in various fields, and in areas such as human-computer interaction (HCI), embodied intelligence, and the design and animation of virtual digital humans, both practitioners and users are increasingly concerned with AI's ability to understand and express emotion. Consequently, the question of whether AI can accurately interpret human emotions remains a critical challenge. To date, two primary classes of AI models have been involved in human emotion analysis: generative models and Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs). To assess the emotional capabilities of these two classes of models, this study introduces MEMO-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark consisting of 7,145 portraits, each depicting one of six different emotions, generated by 12 Text-to-Image (T2I) models. Unlike previous works, MEMO-Bench provides a framework for evaluating both T2I models and MLLMs in the context of sentiment analysis. Additionally, a progressive evaluation approach is employed, moving from coarse-grained to fine-grained metrics, to offer a more detailed and comprehensive assessment of the sentiment analysis capabilities of MLLMs. The experimental results demonstrate that existing T2I models are more effective at generating positive emotions than negative ones. Meanwhile, although MLLMs show a certain degree of effectiveness in distinguishing and recognizing human emotions, they fall short of human-level accuracy, particularly in fine-grained emotion analysis. The MEMO-Bench will be made publicly available to support further research in this area.

Farong Wen, Yijin Guo, Junying Wang et al.

The rapid development of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLM) has led to a wide range of MLLM applications, and a number of benchmark datasets have sprung up in order to assess MLLM abilities. However, full-coverage Q&A testing on large-scale data is resource-intensive and time-consuming. To address this issue, we propose the MLLM Interview (MITV) strategy, which aims to quickly obtain MLLM performance metrics by quizzing fewer question. First, First, we constructed the interview dataset, which was built on an existing MLLM assessment dataset, by adding difficulty labels based on the performance of some typical MLLMs in this dataset. Second, we propose an MLLM Interview strategy, which obtains an initial performance situation of the large model by quizzing a small number of topics and then continuously tries to test the model's limits. Through extensive experiments, the result shows that the MITV strategy proposed in this paper performs well on MLLM benchmark datasets, and it is able to obtain the model evaluation capability faster through a small number of questions and answers.

Junying Wang, Zicheng Zhang, Ye Shen et al.

High-quality, multi-modal benchmarks are crucial for advancing scientific reasoning in large models yet their manual creation is costly and unscalable. To address this bottleneck, we explore the potential for transforming Text-Only QA Pairs (TQAs) into high-quality Multi-Modal QA Pairs (MMQAs), which include three parts: 1) Task Definition \& Evaluation Rubric: We develop a TQA-to-MMQA framework and establish a comprehensive, multi-dimensional MMQA quality rubric that provides principles for the transformation. 2) Benchmark Construction: Then we construct two extensive benchmarks to rigorously evaluate state-of-the-art generation \& understanding models on the distinct tasks of MMQA generation \& MMQA quality evaluation. 3) Preliminary Solution: We develop an agentic system (Q-Mirror), which operationalizes our framework by integrating MMQA generation and evaluation into a closed loop for iterative refinement. Our experiments show that while state-of-the-art models can generate MMQAs, their outputs still leave substantial gaps, underscoring the need for reliable evaluation. We further demonstrate that top-tier understanding models align closely with human judgment in MMQA quality assessment. Leveraging both insights, the Q-Mirror agent raises average scores from 78.90 to 85.22 and pass rates from 72\% to 95\%, offering a practical path to large-scale scientific benchmarks.

Yijin Guo, Zicheng Zhang, Ye Shen et al.

Existing evaluations of foundation models, including recent human-centric approaches, fail to capture what truly matters: user's experience during interaction. Current methods treat evaluation as a matter of output correctness alone, overlooking that user satisfaction emerges from the interplay between response quality and interaction, which limits their ability to account for the mechanisms underlying user experience. To address this gap, we introduce QoNext, the first framework that adapts Quality of Experience (QoE) principles from networking and multimedia to the assessment of foundation models. QoNext identifies experiential factors that shape user experience and incorporates them into controlled experiments, where human ratings are collected under varied configurations. From these studies we construct a QoE-oriented database and train predictive models that estimate perceived user experience from measurable system parameters. Our results demonstrate that QoNext not only enables proactive and fine-grained evaluation but also provides actionable guidance for productized services of optimizing foundation models in practice.

Ye Shen, Junying Wang, Farong Wen et al.

The rapid progress of Multi-Modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) has spurred the creation of numerous benchmarks. However, conventional full-coverage Question-Answering evaluations suffer from high redundancy and low efficiency. Inspired by human interview processes, we propose a multi-to-one interview paradigm for efficient MLLM evaluation. Our framework consists of (i) a two-stage interview strategy with pre-interview and formal interview phases, (ii) dynamic adjustment of interviewer weights to ensure fairness, and (iii) an adaptive mechanism for question difficulty-level chosen. Experiments on different benchmarks show that the proposed paradigm achieves significantly higher correlation with full-coverage results than random sampling, with improvements of up to 17.6% in PLCC and 16.7% in SRCC, while reducing the number of required questions. These findings demonstrate that the proposed paradigm provides a reliable and efficient alternative for large-scale MLLM benchmarking.

Yingjie Zhou, Jiezhang Cao, Farong Wen et al.

Adversarial board games, as a paradigmatic domain of strategic reasoning and intelligence, have long served as both a popular competitive activity and a benchmark for evaluating artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Building on this foundation, we propose an adversarial benchmarking framework to assess the comprehensive performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) through board games competition, compensating the limitation of data dependency of the mainstream Question-and-Answer (Q&A) based benchmark method. We introduce Qi Town, a specialized evaluation platform that supports 5 widely played games and involves 20 LLM-driven players. The platform employs both the Elo rating system and a novel Performance Loop Graph (PLG) to quantitatively evaluate the technical capabilities of LLMs, while also capturing Positive Sentiment Score (PSS) throughout gameplay to assess mental fitness. The evaluation is structured as a round-robin tournament, enabling systematic comparison across players. Experimental results indicate that, despite technical differences, most LLMs remain optimistic about winning and losing, demonstrating greater adaptability to high-stress adversarial environments than humans. On the other hand, the complex relationship between cyclic wins and losses in PLGs exposes the instability of LLMs' skill play during games, warranting further explanation and exploration.