Update README.md
Browse files
README.md
CHANGED
@@ -11,17 +11,19 @@ pinned: false
|
|
11 |
|
12 |
Project page: https://mj-bench.github.io/
|
13 |
|
14 |
-
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ea55b/ea55b3a718db8e8cfabaea1fef7def6df34cbfcc" alt="Dataset Overview"
|
15 |
-
|
16 |
-
|
17 |
While text-to-image models like DALLE-3 and Stable Diffusion are rapidly proliferating, they often encounter challenges such as hallucination, bias, and the production of unsafe, low-quality output. To effectively address these issues, it is crucial to align these models with desired behaviors based on feedback from a multimodal judge. Despite their significance, current multimodal judges frequently undergo inadequate evaluation of their capabilities and limitations, potentially leading to misalignment and unsafe fine-tuning outcomes.
|
18 |
|
19 |
To address this issue, we introduce MJ-Bench, a novel benchmark which incorporates a comprehensive preference dataset to evaluate multimodal judges in providing feedback for image generation models across four key perspectives: **alignment**, **safety**, **image quality**, and **bias**.
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
Specifically, we evaluate a large variety of multimodal judges including
|
22 |
|
23 |
- 6 smaller-sized CLIP-based scoring models
|
24 |
- 11 open-source VLMs (e.g. LLaVA family)
|
25 |
- 4 and close-source VLMs (e.g. GPT-4o, Claude 3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
27 |
We are actively updating the [leaderboard](https://mj-bench.github.io/) and you are welcome to submit the evaluation result of your multimodal judge on [our dataset](https://huggingface.co/datasets/MJ-Bench/MJ-Bench) to [huggingface leaderboard](https://huggingface.co/spaces/MJ-Bench/MJ-Bench-Leaderboard).
|
|
|
11 |
|
12 |
Project page: https://mj-bench.github.io/
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
While text-to-image models like DALLE-3 and Stable Diffusion are rapidly proliferating, they often encounter challenges such as hallucination, bias, and the production of unsafe, low-quality output. To effectively address these issues, it is crucial to align these models with desired behaviors based on feedback from a multimodal judge. Despite their significance, current multimodal judges frequently undergo inadequate evaluation of their capabilities and limitations, potentially leading to misalignment and unsafe fine-tuning outcomes.
|
15 |
|
16 |
To address this issue, we introduce MJ-Bench, a novel benchmark which incorporates a comprehensive preference dataset to evaluate multimodal judges in providing feedback for image generation models across four key perspectives: **alignment**, **safety**, **image quality**, and **bias**.
|
17 |
|
18 |
+
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ea55b/ea55b3a718db8e8cfabaea1fef7def6df34cbfcc" alt="Dataset Overview"
|
19 |
+
|
20 |
Specifically, we evaluate a large variety of multimodal judges including
|
21 |
|
22 |
- 6 smaller-sized CLIP-based scoring models
|
23 |
- 11 open-source VLMs (e.g. LLaVA family)
|
24 |
- 4 and close-source VLMs (e.g. GPT-4o, Claude 3)
|
25 |
+
-
|
26 |
+
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3ba52/3ba52403852e68c774bde6e47f75b278fe3198fb" alt="Evaluation result"
|
27 |
+
|
28 |
|
29 |
We are actively updating the [leaderboard](https://mj-bench.github.io/) and you are welcome to submit the evaluation result of your multimodal judge on [our dataset](https://huggingface.co/datasets/MJ-Bench/MJ-Bench) to [huggingface leaderboard](https://huggingface.co/spaces/MJ-Bench/MJ-Bench-Leaderboard).
|