Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have transformed image captioning, shifting from concise captions to detailed descriptions. We introduce LOTUS, a leaderboard for evaluating detailed captions, addressing three main gaps in existing evaluations: lack of standardized criteria, bias-aware assessments, and user preference considerations. LOTUS comprehensively evaluates various aspects, including caption quality (e.g., alignment, descriptiveness), risks (e.g., hallucination), and societal biases (e.g., gender bias) while enabling preference-oriented evaluations by tailoring criteria to diverse user preferences. Our analysis of recent LVLMs reveals no single model excels across all criteria, while correlations emerge between caption detail and bias risks. Preference-oriented evaluations demonstrate that optimal model selection depends on user priorities.

This paper presents LLaMA-Berry, an advanced mathematical reasoning framework to enhance the problem-solving ability of large language models (LLMs). The framework combines Monte Carlo Tree Search with Self-Refine (SR-MCTS) to optimize the reasoning paths and utilizes a pairwise reward model to evaluate different paths globally. By leveraging the self-critique and rewriting capabilities of LLMs, our SR-MCTS overcomes the inefficiencies and limitations of conventional step-wise and greedy search algorithms, enabling a more efficient exploration of solution spaces. To guide the search process, we propose the Pairwise Preference Reward Model (PPRM), which predicts pairwise preferences between solutions through instruction-following capabilities trained by Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). Finally, the Enhanced Borda Count (EBC) method is adopted to synthesize pairwise preferences into global quantile scores for evaluations. This approach mitigates the challenges of scoring variability and non-independent distributions in mathematical reasoning tasks. The framework has been tested on general and advanced benchmarks, showing superior search efficiency and performance compared to existing open-source and closed-source methods, particularly in complex Olympiad-level benchmarks, including AIME24 and AMC23.