Evaluates multimodal large language models on few-shot learning capabilities across nine diverse tasks. It probes the models' ability to leverage in-context demonstrations (0, 4, or 8 shots) and chain-of-thought reasoning under controlled retrieval settings, measuring performance relative to zero-shot baselines. Use when the user wants to benchmark on FewMMBench, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill fewmmbench-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Fewmmbench Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-fewmmbench-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: fewmmbench-eval
description: Evaluates multimodal large language models on few-shot learning capabilities across nine diverse tasks. It probes the models' ability to leverage in-context demonstrations (0, 4, or 8 shots) and chain-of-thought reasoning under controlled retrieval settings, measuring performance relative to zero-shot baselines. Use when the user wants to benchmark on FewMMBench, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2602.21854
bibtex_key: dogan2026fewmmbench
confidence: high
---
# fewmmbench-eval
> FewMMBench: A Benchmark for Multimodal Few-Shot Learning — Dogan et al. (2026) (arXiv:2602.21854, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates multimodal large language models on few-shot learning capabilities across nine diverse tasks. It probes the models' ability to leverage in-context demonstrations (0, 4, or 8 shots) and chain-of-thought reasoning under controlled retrieval settings, measuring performance relative to zero-shot baselines.
## Datasets
- **FewMMBench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `accuracy` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Proportion of correctly answered questions based on ground-truth labels.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Image-text query with 2-4 candidate answers in a multiple-choice format, optionally augmented with few-shot demonstrations (0, 4, or 8 examples) retrieved via random or graph-cut-based methods, and optionally chain-of-thought reasoning prompts.
**Output**: Model generates a text response selecting one candidate answer. Predictions are normalized via regex-based post-processing or evaluated via perplexity-based pairwise ranking over candidates.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_accuracy(predictions, gold_labels):
correct = 0
for pred, gold in zip(predictions, gold_labels):
normalized_pred = extract_option_regex(pred)
if normalized_pred == gold:
correct += 1
return correct / len(gold_labels)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Regex-based post-processing may misinterpret open-ended or unexpected model outputs.
- Answer order bias can affect accuracy if models are sensitive to candidate placement.
- Perplexity-based ranking is an alternative that may yield different results than exact-match accuracy.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The primary metric is accuracy, computed as the proportion of correctly answered questions based on ground-truth labels. To ensure consistency in answer extraction, especially across models with varying output styles, we apply regex-based post-processing to normalize model predictions.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{dogan2026fewmmbench,
title={FewMMBench: A Benchmark for Multimodal Few-Shot Learning},
author={Dogan et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2602.21854}
}
```
- arXiv: 2602.21854
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!