# UPME: An Unsupervised Peer Review Framework for Multimodal Large Language Model Evaluation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14941 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.14941/

## Key facts

- Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in MLLM training and visual instruction tuning, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models.
- Builds on 38 of its 61 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 19 Mar 2025.

## Placed in

- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [MLLM training and visual instruction tuning](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/mllm-training-and-visual-instruction-tuning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 38)

- [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)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Visual Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08485/) (2023)
- [CogVideoX: Text-to-Video Diffusion Models with An Expert Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.06072/) (2024)
- [Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.12950/) (2023)
- [MMMU: A Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding and Reasoning Benchmark for Expert AGI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.16502/) (2023)
- [PaLM-E: An Embodied Multimodal Language Model](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.03378/) (2023)
- [Learn to Explain: Multimodal Reasoning via Thought Chains for Science Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.09513/) (2022)
- [Video-LLaVA: Learning United Visual Representation by Alignment Before Projection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.10122/) (2023)
- [MM-Vet: Evaluating Large Multimodal Models for Integrated Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.02490/) (2023)
- [Are We on the Right Way for Evaluating Large Vision-Language Models?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.20330/) (2024)
- [CogAgent: A Visual Language Model for GUI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08914/) (2023)
- [NExT-GPT: Any-to-Any Multimodal LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.05519/) (2023)
- [MLLM-as-a-Judge: Assessing Multimodal LLM-as-a-Judge with Vision-Language Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04788/) (2024)
- [LanguageBind: Extending Video-Language Pretraining to N-modality by Language-based Semantic Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.01852/) (2023)
- [Justice or Prejudice? Quantifying Biases in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.02736/) (2024)
- [JudgeBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating LLM-based Judges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12784/) (2024)
- [Aligning with Human Judgement: The Role of Pairwise Preference in Large Language Model Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.16950/) (2024)
- [Is LLM-as-a-Judge Robust? Investigating Universal Adversarial Attacks on Zero-shot LLM Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.14016/) (2024)
- [PRD: Peer Rank and Discussion Improve Large Language Model based Evaluations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.02762/) (2023)
- [Benchmarking Benchmark Leakage in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.18824/) (2024)
- [Programming Is Hard -- Or at Least It Used to Be: Educational Opportunities And Challenges of AI Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.01020/) (2022)
- [A Survey on Benchmarks of Multimodal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08632/) (2024)
- [ChronoMagic-Bench: A Benchmark for Metamorphic Evaluation of Text-to-Time-lapse Video Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.18522/) (2024)
- [MJ-Bench: Is Your Multimodal Reward Model Really a Good Judge for Text-to-Image Generation?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.04842/) (2024)
- [PerceptionGPT: Effectively Fusing Visual Perception into LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.06612/) (2023)
- [MagicTime: Time-lapse Video Generation Models as Metamorphic Simulators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.05014/) (2024)
- [GUI-World: A Video Benchmark and Dataset for Multimodal GUI-oriented Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10819/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [Uniworld-V2: Reinforce Image Editing with Diffusion Negative-aware Finetuning and MLLM Implicit Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.16888/) (2025)
- [EditThinker: Unlocking Iterative Reasoning for Any Image Editor](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.05965/) (2025)
- [DeepReviewer 2.0: A Traceable Agentic System for Auditable Scientific Peer Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.09590/) (2026)
- [ServImage: An Image Generation and Editing Benchmark from Real-world Commercial Imaging Services](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.24023/) (2026)
- [Mitigating Perceptual Judgment Bias in Multimodal LLM-as-a-Judge via Perceptual Perturbation and Reward Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.02578/) (2026)
- [Edit-GRPO: A Locality-Preserving Policy Optimization Framework for Image Editing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.16951/) (2026)
- [The Metanym Game: An LLM Benchmark Without Ground Truth That Rises With the Models It Measures](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.21008/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have emerged to tackle the challenges of Visual Question Answering (VQA), sparking a new research focus on conducting objective evaluations of these models. Existing evaluation methods face limitations due to the significant human workload required to design Q&A pairs for visual images, which inherently restricts the scale and scope of evaluations. Although automated MLLM-as-judge approaches attempt to reduce the human workload through automatic evaluations, they often introduce biases. To address these problems, we propose an Unsupervised Peer review MLLM Evaluation framework. It utilizes only image data, allowing models to automatically generate questions and conduct peer review assessments of answers from other models, effectively alleviating the reliance on human workload. Additionally, we introduce the vision-language scoring system to mitigate the bias issues, which focuses on three aspects: (i) response correctness; (ii) visual understanding and reasoning; and (iii) image-text correlation. Experimental results demonstrate that UPME achieves a Pearson correlation of 0.944 with human evaluations on the MMstar dataset and 0.814 on the ScienceQA dataset, indicating that our framework closely aligns with human-designed benchmarks and inherent human preferences.