测试视觉语言模型在相似问题下的回答一致性,发现准确率高不等于回答稳定。
MM-R$^3$: On (In-)Consistency of Vision-Language Models (VLMs)
- 构建MM-R3基准,评估模型在重述问题、图像改风格、上下文推理中的回答一致性。
- 发现高准确率模型不一定一致,部分模型一致性提升12.5%。
- 提出适配器模块可有效降低不一致性,适合追求可靠生成的开发者使用。
随着大语言模型及其变体的发展,大量研究聚焦于评估其在各类任务上的表现。然而,多数研究仅关注准确性(如视觉问答、定位),而我们的工作探索了另一关键维度——一致性:即模型对语义相近的问题能否给出语义相似或相同的回答。我们指出,一致性是模型鲁棒性和可信度的基本前提。为此,我们提出了MM-R3基准,用于分析当前先进视觉语言模型在三个任务(问题重述、图像改风格、上下文推理)中的准确率与一致性表现。分析显示,一致性与准确率并不总正相关,高准确率模型未必更一致,反之亦然。此外,我们提出一种简单有效的缓解策略:通过训练适配器模块最小化不同提示下的不一致性。该策略使BLIP-2和LLaVA 1.5M等主流模型的一致性平均提升5.7%和12.5%。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
With the advent of LLMs and variants, a flurry of research has emerged, analyzing the performance of such models across an array of tasks. While most studies focus on evaluating the capabilities of state-of-the-art (SoTA) Vision Language Models (VLMs) through task accuracy (e.g., visual question answering, grounding), our work explores the related but complementary aspect of consistency - the ability of a VLM to produce semantically similar or identical responses to semantically similar queries. We note that consistency is a fundamental prerequisite (necessary but not sufficient condition) for robustness and trust in VLMs. Armed with this perspective, we propose the MM-R3 benchmark, which allows us to analyze performance, in terms of consistency and accuracy, of SoTA VLMs on three tasks: Question Rephrasing, Image Restyling, and Context Reasoning. Our analysis reveals that consistency does not always align with accuracy, indicating that models with higher accuracy are not necessarily more consistent, and vice versa. Furthermore, we propose a simple yet effective mitigation strategy in the form of an adapter module trained to minimize inconsistency across prompts. With our proposed strategy, we are able to achieve absolute improvements of 5.7% and 12.5%, on average on widely used VLMs such as BLIP-2 and LLaVa 1.5M in terms of consistency over their existing counterparts.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。