SushantGautam commited on
Commit
8320ba6
·
verified ·
1 Parent(s): d23cf79

Update README.md

Browse files
Files changed (1) hide show
  1. README.md +159 -0
README.md CHANGED
@@ -29,3 +29,162 @@ configs:
29
  - split: test
30
  path: data/test-*
31
  ---
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
29
  - split: test
30
  path: data/test-*
31
  ---
32
+
33
+ # RePOPE (HuggingFace Version)
34
+
35
+ This dataset is a **Hugging Face formatted version of the RePOPE benchmark**, uploaded to make it easier to use in evaluation pipelines and multimodal research.
36
+
37
+ RePOPE is a **corrected relabeling of the POPE benchmark**, which is commonly used to evaluate **object hallucination in Vision-Language Models (VLMs)**. The dataset fixes annotation errors in the original POPE benchmark and removes ambiguous examples.
38
+
39
+ Original paper:
40
+ **RePOPE: Impact of Annotation Errors on the POPE Benchmark**
41
+ Yannic Neuhaus, Matthias Hein (2025)
42
+
43
+ ---
44
+
45
+ # Dataset Overview
46
+
47
+ RePOPE evaluates whether a model **incorrectly claims that an object exists in an image**.
48
+
49
+ Example question format:
50
+
51
+ ```
52
+ Question: Is there a car in the image?
53
+ Answer: Yes / No
54
+ ```
55
+
56
+ The model must answer correctly based on the image.
57
+
58
+ Incorrect answers may indicate **object hallucination**, where the model claims objects exist that are not present.
59
+
60
+ ---
61
+
62
+ # Dataset Statistics
63
+
64
+ * Total examples: **8185**
65
+ 🔄 Changed 494 answers.
66
+ ❌ Removed 815 ambigious questions in POPE.
67
+ * Image source: **COCO 2014 validation set**
68
+ * Categories:
69
+
70
+ * **random**
71
+ * **popular**
72
+ * **adversarial**
73
+
74
+ These splits follow the structure of the original **POPE benchmark**.
75
+
76
+ ---
77
+
78
+ # Dataset Features
79
+
80
+ | Feature | Type | Description |
81
+ | ----------------- | ------ | --------------------------------------------------- |
82
+ | `id` | string | Unique identifier for the sample |
83
+ | `question_id` | string | Identifier linking to the question instance |
84
+ | `question` | string | yes/no question about objects in the image |
85
+ | `answer` | string | Correct label after RePOPE relabeling |
86
+ | `pope_old_answer` | string | Original answer from the POPE benchmark |
87
+ | `image_source` | string | COCO image identifier |
88
+ | `image` | image | The corresponding COCO image |
89
+ | `category` | string | Split category (`random`, `popular`, `adversarial`) |
90
+
91
+ ---
92
+
93
+ # Example
94
+
95
+ ```python
96
+ from datasets import load_dataset
97
+
98
+ dataset = load_dataset("SushantGautam/RePOPE")
99
+
100
+ print(dataset["test"][0])
101
+ ```
102
+
103
+ Example output:
104
+
105
+ ```
106
+ {
107
+ 'id': '...',
108
+ 'question_id': '...',
109
+ 'question': 'Is there a car in the image?',
110
+ 'answer': 'no',
111
+ 'pope_old_answer': 'yes',
112
+ 'image_source': 'COCO_val2014_000000310196',
113
+ 'category': 'adversarial',
114
+ 'image': <PIL.Image>
115
+ }
116
+ ```
117
+
118
+ ---
119
+
120
+ # Why RePOPE?
121
+
122
+ The original POPE dataset contains **annotation errors and ambiguous samples**.
123
+ These issues can significantly impact evaluation metrics such as **F1 score**.
124
+
125
+ Key findings from the RePOPE paper:
126
+
127
+ * Incorrect **"yes" labels**: **9.3%**
128
+ * Incorrect **"no" labels**: **1.7%**
129
+
130
+ This imbalance can distort hallucination evaluation results.
131
+
132
+ RePOPE fixes these issues by:
133
+
134
+ * correcting incorrect labels
135
+ * removing ambiguous samples
136
+ * preserving compatibility with POPE evaluation pipelines
137
+
138
+ ---
139
+
140
+ # Intended Use
141
+
142
+ This dataset is intended for:
143
+
144
+ * Evaluating **vision-language models**
145
+ * Studying **object hallucination**
146
+ * Benchmarking multimodal systems
147
+ * Comparing hallucination mitigation techniques
148
+
149
+ Example models evaluated with POPE/RePOPE:
150
+
151
+ * LLaVA
152
+ * Qwen-VL
153
+ * BLIP
154
+ * GPT-4V
155
+
156
+ ---
157
+
158
+ # Dataset Source
159
+
160
+ Original annotations from the official RePOPE repository:
161
+
162
+ [https://github.com/YanNeu/RePOPE](https://github.com/YanNeu/RePOPE)
163
+
164
+ Images come from:
165
+
166
+ **MS COCO 2014 validation set**
167
+
168
+ ---
169
+
170
+ # Citation
171
+
172
+ If you use this dataset, please cite the original paper:
173
+
174
+ ```
175
+ @article{neuhaus2025repope,
176
+ title={RePOPE: Impact of Annotation Errors on the POPE Benchmark},
177
+ author={Neuhaus, Yannic and Hein, Matthias},
178
+ journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.15707},
179
+ year={2025}
180
+ }
181
+ ```
182
+
183
+ ---
184
+
185
+ # Acknowledgements
186
+
187
+ Thanks to the authors of:
188
+
189
+ * **POPE** – Evaluating object hallucination in large vision-language models
190
+ * **RePOPE** – Correcting annotation errors in the POPE benchmark