# Unipercept Bench Eval

> unipercept-bench-eval

- Skill: `qhjqhj00/unipercept-bench-eval` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add qhjqhj00/unipercept-bench-eval`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00/unipercept-bench-eval/raw
- Safety review: pending (external: skill-scanner PASS, skillspector PASS)
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: qhjqhj00 (https://skillmd.com/u/qhjqhj00)
- Updated: 2026-09-21
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/qhjqhj00/unipercept-bench-eval

---


# unipercept-bench-eval

> UniPercept: Towards Unified Perceptual-Level Image Understanding across Aesthetics, Quality, Structure, and Texture — Cao et al. (2025) (arXiv:2512.21675, 2025)

## What this evaluates

Evaluates multimodal large language models on perceptual-level image understanding across three domains: Image Aesthetics & Art (IAA), Image Quality Assessment (IQA), and Image Structure & Texture Assessment (ISTA). It probes both continuous visual rating (VR) and discrete visual question answering (VQA) capabilities.

## Datasets

- **UniPercept-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/thunderbolt215/UniPercept

## Metrics

- `Acc.` **(primary)** — range: percent
  - Percentage of correctly predicted answers for VQA tasks, averaged across all question templates and domains.
- `(SRCC+PLCC)/2` — range: [0, 1]
  - Average of Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient (SRCC) and Pearson Linear Correlation Coefficient (PLCC) between predicted continuous scores and ground-truth ratings for VR tasks.

## Input / output format

**Input**: An image paired with a text prompt. For VQA, the prompt is a specific question (e.g., Level Prediction, How, What, Which, Why, Yes-No). For VR, the prompt is a task-specific instruction to elicit a quantitative score.

**Output**: For VQA: a categorical answer string matching the ground-truth options. For VR: a continuous numerical score.

## Scoring recipe

```python
# VQA Accuracy
vqa_acc = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, gold) if p == g) / len(gold)

# Visual Rating Score
srcc = spearmanr(predictions, gold)[0]
plcc = pearsonr(predictions, gold)[0]
vr_score = (srcc + plcc) / 2
```

## Common pitfalls

- Visual Rating tasks require generating continuous numerical scores, which often causes general MLLMs to produce hallucinated or unstable predictions compared to specialized models.
- Specialized models used for comparison are trained exclusively on in-domain datasets, so cross-domain evaluation may require retraining or careful prompt engineering to ensure fair comparison.
- VQA accuracy varies significantly by question template (e.g., Level Prediction is much harder than Yes-No), so reporting only the overall average can mask domain-specific weaknesses.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> For VQA, all models were provided with identical prompts corresponding to each question, and their generated answers were compared against the ground-truth options. For VR, we designed task-specific prompts for models lacking a dedicated scoring interface to elicit quantitative predictions... Figure 7: Results on UniPercept-Bench.VQA and VR are evaluated by Acc. and $(SRCC+PLCC)/2$.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{cao2025unipercept,
  title={UniPercept: Towards Unified Perceptual-Level Image Understanding across Aesthetics, Quality, Structure, and Texture},
  author={Cao et al. (2025)},
  year={2025},
  note={arXiv:2512.21675}
}
```

- arXiv: 2512.21675