用对比判断训练模型,能更高效准确地评估图文匹配度。
Modeling Image-Caption Rating from Comparative Judgments
- 用对比判断代替直接打分,降低标注成本
- 在VICR数据集上达Kendall's τ_c=0.804,接近直接评分效果
- 适合需要高一致性标注的图文匹配任务
图像描述评分日益重要,因自动生成的描述广泛用于图像注释。然而,直接评分耗时且主观性强。相比之下,人们更容易比较两组图文对中哪一组更匹配。本文提出一种基于对比判断的机器学习框架,替代直接评分。受先进回归方法启发,采用预训练的ViLBERT模型提取视觉与文本特征,并优化基线模型参数。新回归模型在VICR数据集上取得Kendall's τ_c=0.812,优于基线模型(τ_c=0.758)。相同结构应用于对比学习框架,在对比判断(如A组图文比B组更匹配)数据上训练,性能达到τ_c=0.804,与回归模型相当。小规模人机实验表明,对比判断比直接评分更快,且标注者间一致性更高。结果表明,以对比判断作为训练标签,可实现更低标注成本和更高一致性,模型性能媲美直接评分训练模型。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Image caption rating is becoming increasingly important because computer-generated captions are used extensively for descriptive annotation. However, rating the accuracy of captions in describing images is time-consuming and subjective in nature. In contrast, it is often easier for people to compare (between two pairs) which image-caption pair better matches each other. In this study, we propose a machine learning framework that models such comparative judgments instead of direct ratings. The model can then be applied to rank unseen image-caption pairs in the same way as a regression model trained on direct ratings. Inspired by a state-of-the-art regression approach, we extracted visual and text features using a pre-trained ViLBERT model and tweaked the learning parameters of the baseline model to improve the model performance. This new regression model (with Kendall's $τ_c=0.812$) outperformed the baseline model (with Kendall's $τ_c=0.758$) on the VICR dataset. The same model structure was applied to the comparative learning framework. Trained on comparative judgments (image-caption pair A better matches each other than image-caption pair B), the comparative learning model achieved a performance similar (with Kendall's $τ_c=0.804$) to that of the regression model. In addition, a small-scale human subject study was conducted to compare the cost and quality of direct ratings, pairwise comparisons, and same-image comparisons. The results showed that comparative judgments yielded faster results and greater agreement among human annotators than direct ratings. These results suggest that collecting comparative judgments instead of direct ratings as training data labels is promising for lower annotation costs and greater consistency. The model trained on such comparative judgments can perform as well as the model trained on direct ratings.
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。