This work proposes SciFigQual-Bench, a full-text contextual benchmark that evaluates scientific image across five dimensions (clarity, layout,captionfit, contextrelevance, andmisleadingrisk), and develops SFQ-Agent to achieve auditable and refined scoring through the collection and fusion of modal evidence.
Abstract
Scientific images are the core elements of presenting experimental conclusions, elaborating system architecture, and supporting comparative arguments in scientific papers. However, existing image quality assessment (IQA) methods are predominantly designed for natural photographs or AI-generated content, which cannot be directly applied to scientific papers. The few existing studies on scholarly charts remain confined to visual-surface comparisons, failing to verify caption alignment, citation relevance, or visual misleadingness. To address this, we propose SciFigQual-Bench, a full-text contextual benchmark that evaluates scientific images across five dimensions (clarity, layout, caption fit, context relevance, and misleading risk). The data covers top computer-science conferences from 2020 to 2025; 6,308 images were independently scored by multiple domain experts in five dimensions and aggregated into gold-standard annotations. Unlike previous scientific figure benchmarks, our dataset binds each image to its caption, citing sentence, and manuscript context. To enable automated evaluation on this benchmark, we designed a staged cross-modal evaluation framework SFQ-Agent to achieve auditable and refined scoring through the collection and fusion of modal evidence. Multiple mainstream large models were evaluated on the test subset eval1200, and SFQ-Agent (F3) equipped with GPT-5.6-Sol achieved the lowest overall average absolute error (0.418) and the highest consistency rate (93.4%), consistently outperforming both direct evaluation and auxiliary (Sidecar) visual language model evaluation schemes.
Image-text alignment is a core problem in computer vision with applications in caption evaluation, hallucination detection, data curation, and the benchmarking of text-to-image (T2I) generators. As T2I models improve, benchmarking has become demanding, requiring metrics capable of finding a series of issues like missin...
Vasco Ramos, Sandra Godinho Silva, João Magalhães et al.· 0 citations
Failure analysis shows that the leading systems primarily lose points through object miscounting and geometric artifacts, whereas the trailing systems more frequently produce garbled text, and Ideogram 3.0 also frequently omits requested elements.
Sajjad Abdoli, Ghassan Al-Sumaidaee, Ahmed Rashad· 1 citation
Text-to-image (T2I) models are judged by benchmarks that measure whether requested content appears, but these benchmarks largely overlook the complementary ability to satisfy negated constraints, for example, generating"a non-red cup."Measuring negation raises challenges not faced by affirmation-based benchmarks and re...
Omar Elfatairy, M. A. Bravo, Jessica Bader et al.· 0 citations
Fine-grained image editing requires more than producing a visually plausible result: an editor must execute the requested attribute change precisely while leaving everything else intact. However, existing benchmarks leave a critical gap between realism and verifiability: benchmarks built on realistic images typically r...
Mu-Yao Wang, Chen Zhu, Shi-Qi Yang et al.· 0 citations
Experiments on a new approach for fine-grained evaluation demonstrate that this approach enhances a model’s ability to understand fine-grained differences.
Aozhu Chen, Hazel Doughty, Xirong Li et al.· 0 citations
Exploring how generative AI could make machine vision more accessible to businesses. The post GenEye in a Box: Making Machine Vision Something You Can Just Ask For appeared first on GPT-Lab.
Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity. The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.