Visual Question-Answering (VQA) has become key to user experience, particularly after improved generalization capabilities of Vision-Language Models (VLMs). But evaluating VLMs for an application requirement using a standardized framework in practical settings is still challenging. This paper aims to solve that using an end-to-end framework. We present VQA360 - a novel dataset derived from established VQA benchmarks, annotated with task types, application domains, and knowledge types, for a comprehensive evaluation. We also introduce GoEval, a multimodal evaluation metric developed using GPT-4o, achieving a correlation factor of 56.71% with human judgments. Our experiments with state-of-the-art VLMs reveal that no single model excels universally, thus, making a right choice a key design decision. Proprietary models such as Gemini-1.5-Pro and GPT-4o-mini generally outperform others, but open-source models like InternVL-2-8B and CogVLM-2-Llama-3-19B also demonstrate competitive strengths, while providing additional advantages. Our framework can also be extended to other tasks.

Language Models (LMs) have revolutionized natural language processing, enabling high-quality text generation through prompting and in-context learning. However, models often struggle with long-context summarization due to positional biases, leading to suboptimal extraction of critical information. There are techniques to improve this with fine-tuning, pipelining, or using complex techniques, which have their own challenges. To solve these challenges, we propose QA-prompting - a simple prompting method for summarization that utilizes question-answering as an intermediate step prior to summary generation. Our method extracts key information and enriches the context of text to mitigate positional biases and improve summarization in a single LM call per task without requiring fine-tuning or pipelining. Experiments on multiple datasets belonging to different domains using ten state-of-the-art pre-trained models demonstrate that QA-prompting outperforms baseline and other state-of-the-art methods, achieving up to 29% improvement in ROUGE scores. This provides an effective and scalable solution for summarization and highlights the importance of domain-specific question selection for optimal performance.

The rapid rise of Language Models (LMs) has expanded their use in several applications. Yet, due to constraints of model size, associated cost, or proprietary restrictions, utilizing state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLMs is not always feasible. With open, smaller LMs emerging, more applications can leverage their capabilities, but selecting the right LM can be challenging as smaller LMs don’t perform well universally. This work tries to bridge this gap by proposing a framework to experimentally evaluate small, open LMs in practical settings through measuring semantic correctness of outputs across three practical aspects: task types, application domains and reasoning types, using diverse prompt styles. It also conducts an in-depth comparison of 10 small, open LMs to identify best LM and prompt style depending on specific application requirement using the proposed framework. We also show that if selected appropriately, they can outperform SOTA LLMs like DeepSeek-v2, GPT-4o-mini, Gemini-1.5-Pro, and even compete with GPT-4o.