Evaluates a vision-language model's cross-modal retrieval capabilities (matching images to text and vice versa) and zero-shot image classification performance without task-specific fine-tuning. It also measures transfer learning effectiveness on downstream visual benchmarks via linear probing and full fine-tuning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Flickr30K, MSCOCO, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports R@10.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill align-vl-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Align Vl Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-align-vl-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: align-vl-eval
description: Evaluates a vision-language model's cross-modal retrieval capabilities (matching images to text and vice versa) and zero-shot image classification performance without task-specific fine-tuning. It also measures transfer learning effectiveness on downstream visual benchmarks via linear probing and full fine-tuning. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Flickr30K, MSCOCO, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports R@10.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2102.05918
bibtex_key: jia2021align
confidence: high
---
# align-vl-eval
> Scaling Up Visual and Vision-Language Representation Learning With Noisy Text Supervision — Jia et al. (2021) (arXiv:2102.05918, 2021)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a vision-language model's cross-modal retrieval capabilities (matching images to text and vice versa) and zero-shot image classification performance without task-specific fine-tuning. It also measures transfer learning effectiveness on downstream visual benchmarks via linear probing and full fine-tuning.
## Datasets
- **Flickr30K** — total 31000; splits: train (30000), test (1000)
- **MSCOCO** — total 115000; splits: train (82000), val (30000), test (5000)
## Metrics
- `R@10` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Recall at K: the percentage of queries where the ground-truth match appears in the top K ranked results based on cosine similarity scores between image and text embeddings.
- `Top-1 Accuracy` — range: percent
- The percentage of images correctly classified into the target class among all candidate classes.
## Input / output format
**Input**: An image and a set of candidate text captions (for retrieval) or class name prompts (for zero-shot classification).
**Output**: A ranked list of candidate texts or images sorted by similarity score, or a predicted class label.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_recall_at_k(sim_scores, k, gt_indices):
# sim_scores: (N, M) similarity matrix, gt_indices: (N,) ground truth indices
ranks = np.argsort(-sim_scores, axis=1)
hits = np.any(ranks[:, :k] == gt_indices[:, None], axis=1)
return np.mean(hits) * 100
```
## Common pitfalls
- Using non-standard train/test splits for Flickr30K or MSCOCO breaks comparability with reported SOTA results.
- Failing to apply prompt ensembling (averaging embeddings of multiple templates like 'A photo of a {classname}') and L2 normalization for zero-shot classification drops accuracy by ~2.9%.
- Confusing intra-modal (image-image, text-text) and inter-modal (image-text) retrieval tasks on the CxC dataset, as the model is optimized for cross-modal matching.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> We evaluate ALIGN on Flickr30K and MSCOCO cross-modal retrieval benchmarks, in both zero-shot and fully fine-tuned settings. ... Table 1 shows that, compared to previous works, ALIGN achieves SOTA results in all metrics of Flickr30K and MSCOCO benchmarks. R@1 R@5 R@10
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{jia2021align,
title={Scaling Up Visual and Vision-Language Representation Learning With Noisy Text Supervision},
author={Jia et al. (2021)},
year={2021},
note={arXiv:2102.05918}
}
```
- arXiv: 2102.05918
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!