Alvin Chan
Publications
3D-DefectBench: A Controlled Factorial Study of Vision-Language Model Evaluation Pipelines for Fine-Grained 3D Generation Defects
Automated evaluation is essential for scaling generative 3D systems, where exhaustive human review is costly and slow. However, the reliability of an automated judge depends on the entire evaluation pipeline, not only the underlying vision-language model (VLM), but also how assets are rendered, what visual evidence is provided, how the task is specified, and how human reference labels are constructed. We introduce 3D-DefectBench, a benchmark and framework for systematic analysis of VLM-based 3D defect detection pipelines. It complements holistic ratings and pairwise preferences with nine fine-grained binary defects spanning geometry, texture, and prompt adherence, providing actionable diagnostics for generator development and judge evaluation. Using a balanced factorial design, we vary four pipeline factors, VLM, camera protocol, visual input, and prompt schema, across 84 inference designs and approximately 3.2 million scored defect decisions, followed by staged validation on a broader set of frontier models. Model choice is the largest determinant of agreement with human labels, but the remaining factors also affect performance, interact with model selection, and can change the best configuration. Within the evaluated design space, a compact six-view RGB protocol performs comparably to denser multi-view settings and inputs augmented with depth or surface normals, making it a strong cost-effective default. Under this standardized pipeline, the best of 12 VLM judges still lag behind trained human labelers, while texture agreement drops sharply when expert-consensus labels are replaced by noisier silver labels. These findings show that automated judges should be evaluated as complete pipelines and calibrated across human reference regimes, rather than benchmarked only as standalone models. We release labels, prompts, predictions, and Croissant metadata on Hugging Face.
Automated Creativity Evaluation of Language Models Across Open-Ended Tasks
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in language understanding, reasoning, and generation, sparking growing interest in their creative potential. Realizing this potential requires systematic and scalable methods for evaluating creativity across diverse tasks. However, most existing creativity metrics are tightly coupled to specific tasks, embedding domain assumptions into the evaluation process, and limiting scalability and generality. To address this gap, we introduce an automated, domain-agnostic framework for quantifying LLM creativity across open-ended tasks. Our approach separates the measurement apparatus from the creative task itself, enabling scalable, task-agnostic assessment. Divergent creativity is measured using semantic entropy, a reference-free and robust metric for novelty and diversity, validated against human annotations, LLM-based novelty judgments and baseline diversity measures. Convergent creativity is assessed via a novel retrieval-based multi-agent judge framework that delivers context-sensitive evaluation of task fulfilment with over 60% improved efficiency. We validate our framework in three qualitatively distinct domains: problem-solving (MacGyver), research ideation (HypoGen), and creative writing (BookMIA), using a broad suite of LLMs. Empirical results show that our framework reliably captures key facets of creativity, including novelty, diversity, and task fulfilment, and reveal how model properties, such as size, temperature, recency, and reasoning, impact creative performance. Our work establishes a reproducible and generalizable standard for automated LLM creativity evaluation, paving the way for scalable benchmarking and accelerating progress in creative AI.