arXiv subjects

George Z. Wei

Publications and source records attributed to George Z. Wei.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

MAVERIX: Multimodal Audio-Visual Evaluation and Recognition IndeX

We introduce MAVERIX (Multimodal audiovisual Evaluation and Recognition IndeX), a unified benchmark to probe the video understanding in multimodal LLMs, encompassing video, audio, text inputs with human performance baselines. Although recent advancements in models with vision and audio understanding capabilities have shown substantial progress, the field lacks a standardized evaluation framework to thoroughly assess their cross-modality comprehension performance. MAVERIX curates 2,556 questions from 700 videos, in the form of both multiple-choice and open-ended formats, explicitly designed to evaluate multimodal models through questions that necessitate tight integration of video and audio information, spanning a broad spectrum of agentic scenarios. MAVERIX uniquely provides models with audiovisual questions, closely mimicking the multimodal perceptual experiences available to humans during inference and decision-making processes. To our knowledge, MAVERIX is the first benchmark aimed explicitly at assessing comprehensive audiovisual integration in such granularity. Experiments with state-of-the-art models, including Qwen 2.5 Omni and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite, show performance around 64% accuracy, while human experts reach near-ceiling performance of 92.8%, exposing a substantial gap to human-level comprehension. With standardized evaluation protocols, a rigorously annotated pipeline, and a public toolkit, MAVERIX establishes a challenging testbed for advancing audiovisual multimodal intelligence.

cs.MM↗

arXiv2022

Are Commercial Face Detection Models as Biased as Academic Models?

As facial recognition systems are deployed more widely, scholars and activists have studied their biases and harms. Audits are commonly used to accomplish this and compare the algorithmic facial recognition systems' performance against datasets with various metadata labels about the subjects of the images. Seminal works have found discrepancies in performance by gender expression, age, perceived race, skin type, etc. These studies and audits often examine algorithms which fall into two categories: academic models or commercial models. We present a detailed comparison between academic and commercial face detection systems, specifically examining robustness to noise. We find that state-of-the-art academic face detection models exhibit demographic disparities in their noise robustness, specifically by having statistically significant decreased performance on older individuals and those who present their gender in a masculine manner. When we compare the size of these disparities to that of commercial models, we conclude that commercial models - in contrast to their relatively larger development budget and industry-level fairness commitments - are always as biased or more biased than an academic model.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2022

Robustness Disparities in Face Detection

Facial analysis systems have been deployed by large companies and critiqued by scholars and activists for the past decade. Many existing algorithmic audits examine the performance of these systems on later stage elements of facial analysis systems like facial recognition and age, emotion, or perceived gender prediction; however, a core component to these systems has been vastly understudied from a fairness perspective: face detection, sometimes called face localization. Since face detection is a pre-requisite step in facial analysis systems, the bias we observe in face detection will flow downstream to the other components like facial recognition and emotion prediction. Additionally, no prior work has focused on the robustness of these systems under various perturbations and corruptions, which leaves open the question of how various people are impacted by these phenomena. We present the first of its kind detailed benchmark of face detection systems, specifically examining the robustness to noise of commercial and academic models. We use both standard and recently released academic facial datasets to quantitatively analyze trends in face detection robustness. Across all the datasets and systems, we generally find that photos of individuals who are $\textit{masculine presenting}$, $\textit{older}$, of $\textit{darker skin type}$, or have $\textit{dim lighting}$ are more susceptible to errors than their counterparts in other identities.

cs.CY↗