arXiv subjects

Akhil Eppa

Publications and source records attributed to Akhil Eppa.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

DistortBench: Benchmarking Vision Language Models on Image Distortion Identification

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used in settings where sensitivity to low-level image degradations matters, including content moderation, image restoration, and quality monitoring. Yet their ability to recognize distortion type and severity remains poorly understood. We present DistortBench, a diagnostic benchmark for no-reference distortion perception in VLMs. DistortBench contains 13,500 four-choice questions covering 27 distortion types, six perceptual categories, and five severity levels: 25 distortions inherit KADID-10k calibrations, while two added rotation distortions use monotonic angle-based levels. We evaluate 18 VLMs, including 17 open-weight models from five families and one proprietary model. Despite strong performance on high-level vision-language tasks, the best model reaches only 61.9% accuracy, just below the human majority-vote baseline of 65.7% (average individual: 60.2%), indicating that low-level perceptual understanding remains a major weakness of current VLMs. Our analysis further reveals weak and non-monotonic scaling with model size, performance drops in most base--thinking pairs, and distinct severity-response patterns across model families. We hope DistortBench will serve as a useful benchmark for measuring and improving low-level visual perception in VLMs.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2025

Global PIQA: Evaluating Commonsense Reasoning Across 100+ Languages and Cultures

To date, there exist almost no culturally-specific evaluation benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) that cover a large number of languages and cultures. In this paper, we present Global PIQA, a participatory commonsense reasoning benchmark for over 100 languages, constructed by hand by over 350 researchers from over 65 countries around the world. The 141 language varieties in Global PIQA cover five continents, 19 language families, and 24 writing systems. In the non-parallel split of Global PIQA, over 50% of examples reference local foods, customs, traditions, or other culturally-specific elements. In the parallel split, we translate more "culturally agnostic" commonsense reasoning questions into 131 language varieties, for direct cross-lingual comparisons. In both splits, all examples have been verified by native speakers of the languages. We find that state-of-the-art LLMs perform well on Global PIQA in aggregate, but they exhibit weaker performance in lower-resource languages (e.g. up to a 68% accuracy gap between languages in the parallel split). Global PIQA highlights that in many languages and cultures, everyday knowledge remains an area for improvement in LLMs, alongside more widely-discussed capabilities such as complex reasoning and expert knowledge. Beyond its uses for LLM evaluation, Global PIQA provides a glimpse into the wide diversity of cultures in which human language is embedded.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Curiosity-Driven LLM-as-a-judge for Personalized Creative Judgment

Modern large language models (LLMs) excel at objective tasks such as evaluating mathematical reasoning and factual accuracy, yet they falter when faced with the nuanced, subjective nature of assessing creativity. In this work, we propose a novel curiosity-driven LLM-as-a-judge for evaluating creative writing which is personlized to each individual's creative judgments. We use the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking(TTCW) benchmark introduced in Chakrabarty et al. (2024), which has stories annotated by expert humans across various subjective dimensions like Originality, to test our hypothesis. We show that our method enables models across various sizes, to learn the nuanced creative judgments of different individuals, by showing improvements over baseline supervised finetuning(SFT) method across various evaluation metrics like Pearson correlation, Cohen's and F1 values. Our method is especially useful in subjective evaluations where not all the annotators agree with each other.

cs.CL↗