Skip to content
Back to skills

Omniscience Eval

ASecurity

Evaluates the semantic alignment and factual fidelity of automatically generated scientific image captions. It probes whether dense, context-aware captions can replace visual inputs for downstream reasoning tasks and how well they capture complex scientific figures compared to raw human-written captions. Use when the user wants to benchmark on OmniScience, AI2D, MMMU, MM-MT-Bench, MSEarth, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports cross-modal relevance score.

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 11, 2026
researchpythongo

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill omniscience-eval --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Omniscience Eval?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Omniscience Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-omniscience-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-omniscience-eval)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: omniscience-eval
description: Evaluates the semantic alignment and factual fidelity of automatically generated scientific image captions. It probes whether dense, context-aware captions can replace visual inputs for downstream reasoning tasks and how well they capture complex scientific figures compared to raw human-written captions. Use when the user wants to benchmark on OmniScience, AI2D, MMMU, MM-MT-Bench, MSEarth, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports cross-modal relevance score.
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 2602.13758
  bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
  confidence: high
---

# omniscience-eval

> OmniScience: A Large-scale Multi-modal Dataset for Scientific Image Understanding — Tao et al. (2026) (arXiv:2602.13758, 2026)

## What this evaluates

Evaluates the semantic alignment and factual fidelity of automatically generated scientific image captions. It probes whether dense, context-aware captions can replace visual inputs for downstream reasoning tasks and how well they capture complex scientific figures compared to raw human-written captions.

## Datasets

- **OmniScience** — total ?; splits: test (-1), val (5000)
- **AI2D** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MMMU** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MM-MT-Bench** — total ?; splits: test (-1)
- **MSEarth** — total ?; splits: test (-1)

## Metrics

- `cross-modal relevance score` **(primary)** — range: continuous (higher is better)
  - Computed by Qwen3-VL-Reranker-8B, a single-tower cross-encoder that jointly encodes image-caption pairs and models cross-modal interactions via cross attention to yield instance-level semantic grounding scores.
- `LLM-as-a-Judge score` — range: [1, 5]
  - Mean of four 1–5 scale dimensions: Language Fluency, Information Consistency, Key Information Accuracy, and Detail Level. Scores from Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B-Thinking and Seed-1.5VL are averaged.
- `Caption QA accuracy` — range: [0, 1]
  - Accuracy of GPT-4o-mini answering VQA questions when the visual placeholder is replaced by a generated caption. Evaluated on AI2D, MMMU, MM-MT-Bench, and MSEarth.

## Input / output format

**Input**: Image + caption (for reranker); generated caption + reference caption + image (for LLM-Judge); question + generated caption (for Caption QA proxy task).

**Output**: Scalar relevance score (reranker); 1–5 score per dimension (LLM-Judge); correct/incorrect answer label (Caption QA).

## Scoring recipe

```python
def compute_cross_modal_relevance_score(images, captions):
    scores = []
    for img, cap in zip(images, captions):
        score = reranker_model.encode_cross_modal(img, cap)
        scores.append(score)
    return mean(scores)

def compute_llm_judge_score(captions, references, images):
    all_scores = []
    for cap, ref, img in zip(captions, references, images):
        scores = [judge.evaluate(cap, ref, img) for judge in [judge1, judge2]]
        all_scores.append(mean(scores))
    return mean(all_scores)

def compute_caption_qa_accuracy(questions, captions, gold_answers):
    correct = 0
    for q, cap, gold in zip(questions, captions, gold_answers):
        pred = reasoning_engine.answer(q, caption=cap)
        if pred == gold: correct += 1
    return correct / len(questions)
```

## Common pitfalls

- Using dual-tower embedding models (e.g., CLIP) instead of the specified cross-encoder reranker, which fails to capture fine-grained scientific figure details and yields less precise scores.
- Evaluating raw captions without article context, causing referential ambiguity (e.g., 'as shown in the left panel') and artificially low alignment scores compared to self-contained recaptioned text.
- Treating LLM-as-a-Judge scores as absolute ground truth without acknowledging they are relative rankings validated only on a 300-sample human-annotated subset (Kappa 0.831).

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> We employ Qwen3-VL-Reranker-8B to compute fine-grained relevance scores between images and captions. Compared to embedding based dual-tower similarity models, the reranker adopts a single-tower cross-encoder that jointly encodes image–caption pairs and explicitly models cross-modal interactions using cross attention, yielding more precise instance-level semantic grounding.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{tao2026omniscience,
  title={OmniScience: A Large-scale Multi-modal Dataset for Scientific Image Understanding},
  author={Tao et al. (2026)},
  year={2026},
  note={arXiv:2602.13758}
}
```

- arXiv: 2602.13758

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.