A multi-dimensional image quality assessment framework for T2I tasks that can not only distinguish overall performance differences across models, but also provide interpretable results at the level of individual dimensions is proposed.
Abstract
In recent years, text-to-image (T2I) generation models have made substantial progress, particularly in visual realism and the expression of prompt semantics. However, a key difficulty remains: how to evaluate generated results automatically in a way that is both comprehensive and interpretable, while still being practical for real deployment. To address this issue, this paper proposes a multi-dimensional image quality assessment framework for T2I tasks. The framework examines generated images from five dimensions—text fidelity, perceptual quality, object consistency, relational consistency, and global semantic alignment—and derives a final quality score through normalization and weighted fusion. In terms of methodology, the framework combines Tesseract OCR, perceptual quality analysis based on Laplacian variance and exposure statistics, YOLO object detection, BLIP-based visual question answering, and CLIP image-text similarity, thereby forming a modular evaluation pipeline with diagnostic capability. Experiments on multiple mainstream T2I models and representative prompts show that the proposed method can not only distinguish overall performance differences across models, but also provide interpretable results at the level of individual dimensions.
VMetaphor-Bench, the first benchmark for evaluating visual metaphor generation in T2I models, is introduced, combining a multiple-choice question (MCQ) based protocol of 9,594 questions across four levels of metaphorical fidelity with a dimension-based scoring protocol along three perceptual dimensions.
Chuer Chen, Zi-Chen Wang, Yi He et al.· 0 citations
Recent text-to-image models have made substantial progress in photorealism, aesthetics, and text-image alignment. Yet visually appealing images can still violate real-world plausibility, exhibiting malformed object structures, impossible anatomy, physically implausible interactions, or inconsistent spatial relationship...
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
This work introduces SQUARE-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark that systematically evaluates LMM capabilities as evaluators of AI-generated images across four aspects: Semantics, Quality, Authenticity, and Responsibility, and conducts a proof-of-concept study of LMM-guided iterative editing.
Yu Zhao, Jia-Rui Wang, Hui-Yu Duan et al.· 0 citations
Quality-assessment experiments on AGIQA-3K and AIGCIQA2023, with ArtBench-10 used for auxiliary style pretraining, demonstrate leading performance across multiple assessment dimensions and verify the effectiveness of the proposed multidimensional assessment design.
GenPuzzle provides a testbed for measuring progress from image rendering toward visual problem solving, and uses task-specific evaluation protocols that select the automatic judge by measuring agreement with human reference scores.