mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Advancing the Understanding and Evaluation of AR-Generated Scenes: When Vision-Language Models Shine and Stumble

arXiv 2501.13964 ↗First posted 21 Jan 2025cs.CV cs.AI cs.HCcited by 9

On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

Augmented Reality (AR) enhances the real world by integrating virtual content, yet ensuring the quality, usability, and safety of AR experiences presents significant challenges. Could Vision-Language Models (VLMs) offer a solution for the automated evaluation of AR-generated scenes? Could Vision-Language Models (VLMs) offer a solution for the automated evaluation of AR-generated scenes? In this study, we evaluate the capabilities of three state-of-the-art commercial VLMs -- GPT, Gemini, and Claude -- in identifying and describing AR scenes. For this purpose, we use DiverseAR, the first AR dataset specifically designed to assess VLMs' ability to analyze virtual content across a wide range of AR scene complexities. Our findings demonstrate that VLMs are generally capable of perceiving and describing AR scenes, achieving a True Positive Rate (TPR) of up to 93% for perception and 71% for description. While they excel at identifying obvious virtual objects, such as a glowing apple, they struggle when faced with seamlessly integrated content, such as a virtual pot with realistic shadows. Our results highlight both the strengths and the limitations of VLMs in understanding AR scenarios. We identify key factors affecting VLM performance, including virtual content placement, rendering quality, and physical plausibility. This study underscores the potential of VLMs as tools for evaluating the quality of AR experiences.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in VLM benchmarks and visual reasoning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 11 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jan 2025.

Builds on

11 of 25 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Benchmarking VLMs' Reasoning About Persuasive Atypical Images16 Sep
  2. 2023ROME: Evaluating Pre-trained Vision-Language Models on Reasoning beyond Visual Common Sense30 Oct
  3. 2023Vision-Language Models for Vision Tasks: A Survey3 Apr

Other references · 8

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  2. 2022Exploring CLIP for Assessing the Look and Feel of Imagescited by 974
  3. 2024Eyes Wide Shut? Exploring the Visual Shortcomings of Multimodal LLMscited by 719
  4. 2020A Survey on Visual Transformercited by 653
  5. 2024SpatialBot: Precise Spatial Understanding with Vision Language Modelscited by 146
  6. 2023Breaking Common Sense: WHOOPS! A Vision-and-Language Benchmark of Synthetic and Compositional Imagescited by 79
  7. 2018Hallucinated-IQA: No-Reference Image Quality Assessment via Adversarial Learningcited by 49
  8. 2020Evaluating Mixed and Augmented Reality: A Systematic Literature Review (2009-2019)cited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 5; 2026: 4.

9 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Harnessing Vision-Language Models for Perceptual Quality Assessment and Autonomous Content Adjustment in Augmented Reality
  2. 2026CinemaWorld: Generative Augmented Reality with LLMs and 3D Scene Generation for Movie Augmentation ↗
  3. 2024An Introduction to Vision-Language Modeling
  4. 2025CIVET: Systematic Evaluation of Understanding in VLMs
  5. 2025Vision language models have difficulty recognizing virtual objects
  6. 2024OCTO+: A Suite for Automatic Open-Vocabulary Object Placement in Mixed Reality
  7. 2025ViDDAR: Vision Language Model-Based Task-Detrimental Content Detection for Augmented Reality
  8. 2025Generative AI Framework for 3D Object Generation in Augmented Reality