Evaluates unified multimodal large language models (U-MLLMs) on their ability to handle mixed-modality tasks that combine visual understanding, text generation, and sequential reasoning. It probes capabilities such as interleaved image-text generation, visual chain-of-thought reasoning, and image editing with explanations. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MME-Unify, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Acc.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill mme-unify-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Mme Unify Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-mme-unify-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: mme-unify-eval
description: Evaluates unified multimodal large language models (U-MLLMs) on their ability to handle mixed-modality tasks that combine visual understanding, text generation, and sequential reasoning. It probes capabilities such as interleaved image-text generation, visual chain-of-thought reasoning, and image editing with explanations. Use when the user wants to benchmark on MME-Unify, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Acc.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2504.03641
bibtex_key: xie2025mmeunify
confidence: high
---
# mme-unify-eval
> MME-Unify: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Unified Multimodal Understanding and Generation Models — Xie et al. (2025) (arXiv:2504.03641, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates unified multimodal large language models (U-MLLMs) on their ability to handle mixed-modality tasks that combine visual understanding, text generation, and sequential reasoning. It probes capabilities such as interleaved image-text generation, visual chain-of-thought reasoning, and image editing with explanations.
## Datasets
- **MME-Unify** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
## Metrics
- `Acc` **(primary)** — range: percent
- Standard accuracy calculated as the percentage of instances where the model's output exactly matches the ground truth answer or generated image.
- `Acc+` — range: percent
- Stricter accuracy metric that requires both the text reasoning component and the image generation component to be correct simultaneously.
- `Unify Score` — range: percent
- Overall benchmark score aggregating performance across comprehension, generation, and unified task subdomains.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Multimodal prompts consisting of images and text instructions/questions. Unified tasks may include reference images and complex, multi-step instructions requiring sequential reasoning.
**Output**: Text responses and/or generated images. Unified tasks require interleaved text and image outputs, or specific actions and coordinates.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_metrics(predictions, golds):
acc_list = []
acc_plus_list = []
for pred, gold in zip(predictions, golds):
text_ok = (pred.text == gold.text)
img_ok = (pred.image == gold.image)
acc_list.append(1.0 if text_ok or img_ok else 0.0)
acc_plus_list.append(1.0 if text_ok and img_ok else 0.0)
return {
'Acc': sum(acc_list) / len(acc_list) * 100,
'Acc+': sum(acc_plus_list) / len(acc_plus_list) * 100
}
```
## Common pitfalls
- Evaluating only text or only image accuracy can mask severe deficiencies in the other modality, as models often excel at one while failing at the other.
- Multi-step Visual CoT tasks suffer from cascading errors; mistakes in early reasoning steps compound, causing final accuracy to drop to near zero even if intermediate outputs are partially correct.
- Complex instruction following for image generation (e.g., drawing auxiliary lines) is frequently ignored, with models producing style-biased or irrelevant images despite correct text reasoning.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> For each unify task in Table[2], we require the models to generate the correct image and perform correct reasoning. Under these conditions, even for simple tasks such as answering common questions and generating images, the best open-sourced model (Anole) only achieves an accuracy of 59.65% and accuracy-plus of 38% (Table[3]).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{xie2025mmeunify,
title={MME-Unify: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Unified Multimodal Understanding and Generation Models},
author={Xie et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2504.03641}
}
```
- arXiv: 2504.03641
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!