Skip to content

RoboVQA Evaluation #27

Open
Open

Description

@LongXinKou

Hi, thank you for your excellent work!

I'm currently evaluating models on the RoboVQA benchmark and noticed that in your code (e.g., judge_robovqa), you implemented a customized BLEU evaluation scheme that:

  • Applies jieba tokenization to Chinese answers,
  • Performs max-over-truncated-prediction (±5 window),
  • Computes BLEU-1 to BLEU-4 separately using sentence_bleu.

Meanwhile, the official RoboVQA evaluation protocol (e.g., robovqa_aggregate_results) seems to use the standard sacrebleu.sentence_bleu(pred, [ref]) without these additional steps.

I’m curious about the motivation behind adopting this alternative evaluation strategy. Do you consider the official metric too strict or less suitable for certain types of answers? Or do you find that your version better captures the intended model behavior?

I'd really appreciate any clarification on this, as I’m trying to ensure my evaluation results are consistent and fairly comparable. Thank you again for your contributions!

Activity

  1. Yuheng2000 commented on Oct 15, 2025

    @Yuheng2000
    Contributor

    Hi! Thanks for your detailed question and careful reading of the code.

    Actually, there wasn’t any special motivation behind that evaluation choice — we simply followed the version used internally at that time, so it was more of a practical decision than a methodological one :)

    You can safely use the official RoboVQA evaluation protocol for consistent comparison; our customized script was mainly a legacy setup rather than an intentional deviation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions