跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.12524 · v1

EditJudge-Bench: Auditing VLM Image-Edit Judges with Synthetic Ground Truth

首次提交 2026-11-09 22:59
版本更新 2026-11-09 22:59
雷达观测 2026-11-10 15:22
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used as automated judges for image-editing benchmarks, yet their reliability is poorly understood. Auditing these judges is difficult because real edited images lack controlled ground truth and entangle the requested changes with model artefacts, unintended side effects, and ambiguous degrees of success. In this paper, we introduce EditJudge-Bench, a diagnostic benchmark of 1,382 synthetic before/after image pairs rendered in Blender, with edits parameterised across nine categories derived from real user requests and exact ground truth from known 3D scene parameters. Because every edit is generated by a known intervention on a controlled scene, EditJudge-Bench evaluates VLM judges as binary verifiers of whether an instruction was correctly executed, isolating judge perception from editor quality. Across 25 judge configurations, we find substantial reliability gaps: (a) the widely adopted VIEScore template reaches only 69.0% AUROC with GPT-4o; (b) fine-tuned judges score 51.7-66.3%; spatial edits such as rotation and shape remain challenging; (c) prompt-formatting choices like image-text ordering shift performance by up to 14.1 points. Despite using only synthetic data, judge rankings on EditJudge-Bench correlate strongly with two real-image human-preference benchmarks ($ρ$=0.95 and $ρ$=0.71), indicating that controlled audits surface failure modes relevant to real evaluation.

作者备注:Accepted to NeurIPS 2026 (Evaluations & Datasets Track). 26 pages, 6 figures, 5 tables. Project page: https://jenspars.github.io/EditJudge-Bench/

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-09 22:59 · 最新观测版本

EditJudge-Bench: Auditing VLM Image-Edit Judges with Synthetic Ground Truth

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used as automated judges for image-editing benchmarks, yet their reliability is poorly understood. Auditing these judges is difficult because real edited images lack controlled ground truth and entangle the requested changes with model artefacts, unintended side effects, and ambiguous degrees of success. In this paper, we introduce EditJudge-Bench, a diagnostic benchmark of 1,382 synthetic before/after image pairs rendered in Blender, with edits parameterised across nine categories derived from real user requests and exact ground truth from known 3D scene parameters. Because every edit is generated by a known intervention on a controlled scene, EditJudge-Bench evaluates VLM judges as binary verifiers of whether an instruction was correctly executed, isolating judge perception from editor quality. Across 25 judge configurations, we find substantial reliability gaps: (a) the widely adopted VIEScore template reaches only 69.0% AUROC with GPT-4o; (b) fine-tuned judges score 51.7-66.3%; spatial edits such as rotation and shape remain challenging; (c) prompt-formatting choices like image-text ordering shift performance by up to 14.1 points. Despite using only synthetic data, judge rankings on EditJudge-Bench correlate strongly with two real-image human-preference benchmarks ($ρ$=0.95 and $ρ$=0.71), indicating that controlled audits surface failure modes relevant to real evaluation.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗