Benchmarking color judgment in multimodal LLMs with CIE-computable ground truth

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are now used as zero-shot judges of image quality, but their color judgments are rarely tested with colorimetric ground truth. We present a five-task benchmark based on the CIE colorimetric framework: AWB pair judgment, skin-tone bias direction, CCT estimation, CIE Delta E 2000 pair ordering, and color naming under changing illuminants. We test eight MLLM endpoints, including four Qwen3-VL variants, GLM-4.5V, GPT-5.4, Claude-Opus-4.7, and Gemini-3.1-Pro. The models often solve coarse binary AWB judgments, but they remain weak on numeric CCT estimation and on some fine color-difference judgments. On ColorChecker-24 stimuli, the three closed-weight frontier models reach CCT MAE of 715-1056 K, compared with 1358-2133 K for the five open-weight models. A non-ColorChecker control shows that this advantage is partly template-dependent. The results suggest that current MLLMs have useful color words and coarse visual priors, but their color judgments are not reliably calibrated to CIE-computable color differences.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
arXiv (Cornell University)
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2610.40212
Primary Topic
Color Science and Applications
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Benchmarking color judgment in multimodal LLMs with CIE-computable ground truth

Shuwei Yue, Kaida Xiao, Zhihua Wang, Qiao Chen
arXiv (Cornell University)
Color Science and Applications
preprint

Benchmarking color judgment in multimodal LLMs with CIE-computable ground truth

Shuwei Yue, Kaida Xiao, Zhihua Wang, Qiao Chen
preprint en

Abstract

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are now used as zero-shot judges of image quality, but their color judgments are rarely tested with colorimetric ground truth. We present a five-task benchmark based on the CIE colorimetric framework: AWB pair judgment, skin-tone bias direction, CCT estimation, CIE Delta E 2000 pair ordering, and color naming under changing illuminants. We test eight MLLM endpoints, including four Qwen3-VL variants, GLM-4.5V, GPT-5.4, Claude-Opus-4.7, and Gemini-3.1-Pro. The models often solve coarse binary AWB judgments, but they remain weak on numeric CCT estimation and on some fine color-difference judgments. On ColorChecker-24 stimuli, the three closed-weight frontier models reach CCT MAE of 715-1056 K, compared with 1358-2133 K for the five open-weight models. A non-ColorChecker control shows that this advantage is partly template-dependent. The results suggest that current MLLMs have useful color words and coarse visual priors, but their color judgments are not reliably calibrated to CIE-computable color differences.

arXiv (Cornell University)
Color Science and Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon