analiza aiqbench
This paper is a benchmark study of multi-image spatial reasoning in vision-language models, so AI is the primary subject. Its central point is that item-level accuracy hides fragility: GPT three-shot reaches 50% item accuracy, yet the best three-frame joint accuracy is only 5/48 (10.42%), and repeated runs show unstable answers. For readers evaluating models, the takeaway is to report joint, consistency-based metrics alongside headline accuracy, since few-shot prompting and adaptation do not reliably improve joint correctness.
Frame Evidence:A Benchmark for Reference Frames and Visual Evidence in Multi-Image Spatial Reasoning
arXiv:2610.19564v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: A spatial answer depends on the reference frame specified in language and its supporting visual evidence. Item accuracy alone obscures whether correctness persists when either changes. We introduce Frame Evidence, a benchmark of 320 matched triplets and 960 Chinese multiple-choice questions from captured and rendered scenes. One family compares three grounded reference frames over fixed images. The other pairs image deletion annotated as insufficient with answer-preserving addition. Joint metrics require correct answers across all three frames and paired evidence variants. Across 20 configurations on 288 held-out questions, GPT three-shot reaches 50.00\% item accuracy, but the best three-frame group accuracy is 5/48 (10.42\%), reached by GPT two-shot. Few-shot prompting and task-specific adaptation improve item accuracy without consistently improving joint correctness. Input controls show where images support matched success, while repeated executions reveal answer instability beneath similar scores.
Abstract:A spatial answer depends on the reference frame specified in language and its supporting visual evidence. Item accuracy alone obscures whether correctness persists when either changes. We introduce Frame Evidence, a benchmark of 320 matched triplets and 960 Chinese multiple-choice questions from captured and rendered scenes. One family compares three grounded reference frames over fixed images. The other pairs image deletion annotated as insufficient with answer-preserving addition. Joint metrics require correct answers across all three frames and paired evidence variants. Across 20 configurations on 288 held-out questions, GPT three-shot reaches 50.00\% item accuracy, but the best three-frame group accuracy is 5/48 (10.42\%), reached by GPT two-shot. Few-shot prompting and task-specific adaptation improve item accuracy without consistently improving joint correctness. Input controls show where images support matched success, while repeated executions reveal answer instability beneath similar scores.
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.19564 [cs.CV]
(or arXiv:2610.19564v2 [cs.CV] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.19564 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 234 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
[AINews] High Taste Testers Ep. 1
Latent Space · 17 oct. 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · 18 sept. 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · 10 sept. 2026

[AINews] Claude Opus 5.5, the new default model for AINews — and everybody cuts prices 40-50%
Latent Space · 23 sept. 2026