Evaluates a multimodal model's capability to generate images from text prompts and edit existing images based on natural language instructions. It probes semantic alignment, fine-grained text rendering accuracy, and instruction-following fidelity across diverse visual tasks. Use when the user wants to benchmark on GenEval, DPG-bench, OneIG-Bench, TIIF-Bench mini, LeX-Bench, CVTG-2K, LongText-Bench, ImgEdit, GEdit-Bench, OmniContext, ICE-Bench, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Word ...
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill emu35-t2i-x2i-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Emu35 T2i X2i Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-emu35-t2i-x2i-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: emu35-t2i-x2i-eval
description: Evaluates a multimodal model's capability to generate images from text prompts and edit existing images based on natural language instructions. It probes semantic alignment, fine-grained text rendering accuracy, and instruction-following fidelity across diverse visual tasks. Use when the user wants to benchmark on GenEval, DPG-bench, OneIG-Bench, TIIF-Bench mini, LeX-Bench, CVTG-2K, LongText-Bench, ImgEdit, GEdit-Bench, OmniContext, ICE-Bench, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Word Accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2510.26583
bibtex_key: cui2025emu35
confidence: high
---
# emu35-t2i-x2i-eval
> Emu3.5: Native Multimodal Models are World Learners — Yufeng Cui et al. (2025) (arXiv:2510.26583, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a multimodal model's capability to generate images from text prompts and edit existing images based on natural language instructions. It probes semantic alignment, fine-grained text rendering accuracy, and instruction-following fidelity across diverse visual tasks.
## Datasets
- **GenEval** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **DPG-bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **OneIG-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **TIIF-Bench mini** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **LeX-Bench** — total 1310; splits: test (1310)
- **CVTG-2K** — total 2000; splits: test (2000)
- **LongText-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **ImgEdit** — total 737; splits: test (737)
- **GEdit-Bench** — total 606; splits: test (606)
- **OmniContext** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **ICE-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `Word Accuracy` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Exact match rate of rendered text characters in the generated image compared to the prompt. Higher is better.
- `Normalized Edit Distance (NED)` — range: [0, 1]
- 1 - (Edit Distance / max(len(pred), len(gold))). Measures character-level similarity; higher is better.
- `G_O` — range: [0, 5]
- Overall score computed as the mean of GPT-4o/GPT-4.1 judge scores across all samples in the benchmark. Not the mean of sub-metrics.
- `Overall (OneIG-Bench)` — range: [0, 1]
- Average of five dimensions: Alignment, Text, Reasoning, Style, and Diversity.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Text prompt (for T2I) or image(s) + natural language instruction (for X2I/editing).
**Output**: Generated image (T2I) or edited image (X2I). Evaluated at ~1024x1024 resolution for X2I, up to 2048px for T2I.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(predictions, golds, benchmark):
if benchmark == 'CVTG-2K':
word_acc = sum(1 for p, g in zip(predictions, golds) if p == g) / len(golds)
ned = [1 - edit_distance(p, g) / max(len(p), len(g)) for p, g in zip(predictions, golds)]
return {'Word Accuracy': word_acc, 'NED': mean(ned)}
elif benchmark in ['ImgEdit', 'GEdit-Bench']:
# LLM-as-judge scoring (GPT-4.1 or GPT-4o)
scores = [llm_judge_score(p, g, benchmark) for p, g in zip(predictions, golds)]
return {'G_O': mean(scores)}
elif benchmark == 'OneIG-Bench':
dims = ['Alignment', 'Text', 'Reasoning', 'Style', 'Diversity']
dim_scores = [llm_judge_score(p, g, dim) for dim in dims]
return {'Overall': mean(dim_scores)}
return {'score': -1}
```
## Common pitfalls
- G_O in GEdit-Bench is the mean score across all samples, not the arithmetic mean of G_SC and G_PQ.
- X2I evaluations must use ~1024x1024 resolution; T2I supports up to 2048px. Mismatched resolutions invalidate comparisons.
- Different benchmarks use different LLM judges (GPT-4o vs GPT-4.1); mixing them or assuming identical scoring rubrics leads to incorrect rankings.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> For evaluation, two specific metrics are employed: Word Accuracy and Normalized Edit Distance (NED). As illustrated in the table, Emu3.5 outperforms state-of-the-art T2I models by a large margin, further demonstrating its strong capability in English text rendering.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{cui2025emu35,
title={Emu3.5: Native Multimodal Models are World Learners},
author={Yufeng Cui et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2510.26583}
}
```
- arXiv: 2510.26583
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!