# DARE: Diverse Visual Question Answering with Robustness Evaluation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.18023 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.18023/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models.
- Builds on 43 of its 54 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 26 Sep 2024.

## Placed in

- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/vlm-benchmarks-and-visual-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 43)

- [Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00020/) (2021)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1405.0312/) (2014)
- [LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.13971/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.07193/) (2023)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Visual Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08485/) (2023)
- [End-to-End Object Detection with Transformers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.12872/) (2020)
- [Improved Baselines with Visual Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03744/) (2023)
- [Flamingo: a Visual Language Model for Few-Shot Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.14198/) (2022)
- [MiniGPT-4: Enhancing Vision-Language Understanding with Advanced Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.10592/) (2023)
- [Making the V in VQA Matter: Elevating the Role of Image Understanding in Visual Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1612.00837/) (2016)
- [VQA: Visual Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1505.00468/) (2015)
- [MMBench: Is Your Multi-modal Model an All-around Player?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.06281/) (2023)
- [Towards VQA Models That Can Read](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.08920/) (2019)
- [DocVQA: A Dataset for VQA on Document Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.00398/) (2020)
- [LVIS: A Dataset for Large Vocabulary Instance Segmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.03195/) (2019)
- [Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.08786/) (2021)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [VizWiz Grand Challenge: Answering Visual Questions from Blind People](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1802.08218/) (2018)
- [Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formatting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.11324/) (2023)
- [PaLI: A Jointly-Scaled Multilingual Language-Image Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.06794/) (2022)
- [Eyes Wide Shut? Exploring the Visual Shortcomings of Multimodal LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.06209/) (2024)
- [ViperGPT: Visual Inference via Python Execution for Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08128/) (2023)
- [Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1707.07328/) (2017)
- [From Recognition to Cognition: Visual Commonsense Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.10830/) (2018)
- [BLINK: Multimodal Large Language Models Can See but Not Perceive](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.12390/) (2024)
- [Winoground: Probing Vision and Language Models for Visio-Linguistic Compositionality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.03162/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.03882/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [Probing Visual Language Priors in VLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.00569/) (2024)
- [iNews: A Multimodal Dataset for Modeling Personalized Affective Responses to News](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.03335/) (2025)
- [Multiplicity is an Inevitable and Inherent Challenge in Multimodal Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.19614/) (2025)
- [VisionTrap: Unanswerable Questions On Visual Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.17262/) (2025)
- [BLaVe-CoT: Consistency-Aware Visual Question Answering for Blind and Low Vision Users](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.06010/) (2025)
- [CounterCount: A Diagnostic Framework for Counting Bias in Vision Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.17826/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Vision Language Models (VLMs) extend remarkable capabilities of text-only large language models and vision-only models, and are able to learn from and process multi-modal vision-text input. While modern VLMs perform well on a number of standard image classification and image-text matching tasks, they still struggle with a number of crucial vision-language (VL) reasoning abilities such as counting and spatial reasoning. Moreover, while they might be very brittle to small variations in instructions and/or evaluation protocols, existing benchmarks fail to evaluate their robustness (or rather the lack of it). In order to couple challenging VL scenarios with comprehensive robustness evaluation, we introduce DARE, Diverse Visual Question Answering with Robustness Evaluation, a carefully created and curated multiple-choice VQA benchmark. DARE evaluates VLM performance on five diverse categories and includes four robustness-oriented evaluations based on the variations of: prompts, the subsets of answer options, the output format and the number of correct answers. Among a spectrum of other findings, we report that state-of-the-art VLMs still struggle with questions in most categories and are unable to consistently deliver their peak performance across the tested robustness evaluations. The worst case performance across the subsets of options is up to 34% below the performance in the standard case. The robustness of the open-source VLMs such as LLaVA 1.6 and Idefics2 cannot match the closed-source models such as GPT-4 and Gemini, but even the latter remain very brittle to different variations.