VBench: Video Generation Quality Benchmark
VBench (CVPR 2024) breaks text-to-video quality into 16 evaluation dimensions, from temporal flickering to text alignment. This Potato config reproduces the human preference ratings VBench uses to validate those dimensions.
About this dataset
VBench is a benchmark suite for text-to-video generative models, built by Ziqi Huang and colleagues at the Shanghai AI Laboratory and Nanyang Technological University and published as a CVPR 2024 Highlight paper.
Rather than scoring a video with a single number, VBench splits quality into 16 dimensions. Seven feed a Quality Score (subject consistency, background consistency, temporal flickering, motion smoothness, dynamic degree, aesthetic quality, imaging quality) and nine feed a Semantic Score that measures whether the video matches the prompt (object class, multiple objects, human action, color, spatial relationship, scene, appearance style, temporal style, overall consistency). Each dimension has roughly 100 tailored prompts and its own automatic evaluation method.
To check that the automatic metrics track what people actually perceive, the authors collected a dataset of human preference annotations for each dimension. They report that VBench scores align with these human judgments, which is what lets the benchmark stand in for direct human evaluation when ranking models.
The Potato config below reproduces the human annotation side of VBench: Likert scales for temporal consistency, motion smoothness, aesthetic quality, and text-to-video alignment, plus pairwise comparison of two generated videos. Collecting these ratings gives the same per-dimension human preference signal VBench uses to validate its dimensions.
- Venue
- CVPR 2024 (Highlight)
- Evaluation dimensions
- 16
- Dimension groups
- Quality Score + Semantic Score
- Prompts per dimension
- ~100
- Content categories
- 8
- Human validation
- Per-dimension preference annotations
Configuration Fileconfig.yaml
This Potato config reproduces the annotation task. Save it as config.yaml and run potato start config.yaml to try it.
# VBench Video Generation Quality Assessment Configuration
# Based on Huang et al., CVPR 2024
# Task: Rate and compare AI-generated video quality across multiple dimensions
annotation_task_name: "VBench Video Generation Quality Assessment"
task_dir: "."
# Data configuration
data_files:
- sample-data.json
item_properties:
id_key: "id"
text_key: "video_url"
# Output
output_annotation_dir: "annotation_output/"
output_annotation_format: "json"
# Annotation schemes
annotation_schemes:
# Temporal consistency rating
- name: "temporal_consistency"
description: |
Rate the temporal consistency of the generated video.
Consider: Do objects maintain their appearance across frames?
Are there flickering artifacts or sudden appearance changes?
annotation_type: likert
size: 5
min_label: "Very Inconsistent"
max_label: "Very Consistent"
labels:
- "1 - Severe flickering, objects change drastically"
- "2 - Noticeable inconsistencies across frames"
- "3 - Some minor temporal artifacts"
- "4 - Mostly consistent with rare artifacts"
- "5 - Perfectly consistent throughout"
# Motion smoothness rating
- name: "motion_smoothness"
description: |
Rate the smoothness and naturalness of motion in the video.
Consider: Are movements fluid? Are there jerky transitions?
Do objects move in physically plausible ways?
annotation_type: likert
size: 5
min_label: "Very Jerky"
max_label: "Very Smooth"
labels:
- "1 - Extremely jerky, unnatural movement"
- "2 - Frequently stuttering or abrupt motions"
- "3 - Somewhat smooth with occasional issues"
- "4 - Mostly smooth and natural motion"
- "5 - Perfectly smooth, natural movement"
# Aesthetic quality rating
- name: "aesthetic_quality"
description: |
Rate the overall aesthetic quality of the generated video.
Consider: Visual appeal, color harmony, composition, and artistic quality.
annotation_type: likert
size: 5
min_label: "Very Poor"
max_label: "Excellent"
labels:
- "1 - Very poor visual quality, unappealing"
- "2 - Below average aesthetics"
- "3 - Acceptable visual quality"
- "4 - Good aesthetic quality"
- "5 - Excellent, visually impressive"
# Text-video alignment rating
- name: "text_alignment"
description: |
Rate how well the generated video matches the text prompt.
Consider: Are all elements from the prompt present?
Does the video accurately depict the described scene?
annotation_type: likert
size: 5
min_label: "No Match"
max_label: "Perfect Match"
labels:
- "1 - Completely unrelated to prompt"
- "2 - Vaguely related but misses key elements"
- "3 - Partially matches the prompt"
- "4 - Mostly matches with minor omissions"
- "5 - Perfectly depicts the prompt"
# Pairwise comparison
- name: "pairwise_preference"
description: |
Compare Video A and Video B generated from the same prompt.
Which video is better overall? Consider all quality dimensions.
annotation_type: pairwise
labels:
- name: "Video A is much better"
key_value: "1"
- name: "Video A is slightly better"
key_value: "2"
- name: "About the same"
key_value: "3"
- name: "Video B is slightly better"
key_value: "4"
- name: "Video B is much better"
key_value: "5"
# Temporal quality marking
- name: "quality_segments"
description: |
Mark any temporal segments where quality notably drops or improves.
Use this to flag specific moments of artifacts or excellence.
annotation_type: "video_annotation"
mode: "segment"
labels:
- name: "quality_drop"
color: "#EF4444"
key_value: "d"
- name: "quality_peak"
color: "#22C55E"
key_value: "p"
- name: "artifact"
color: "#F59E0B"
key_value: "a"
frame_stepping: true
show_timecode: true
playback_rate_control: true
# User configuration
allow_all_users: true
# Task assignment
instances_per_annotator: 30
annotation_per_instance: 3
# Instructions
annotation_instructions: |
## VBench Video Generation Quality Assessment Task
Your goal is to evaluate the quality of AI-generated videos on multiple dimensions.
### Quality Dimensions to Rate (1-5 scale):
**Temporal Consistency:**
- Do objects maintain their appearance across frames?
- Are there flickering or morphing artifacts?
**Motion Smoothness:**
- Are movements fluid and natural?
- Are there jerky or physically impossible motions?
**Aesthetic Quality:**
- Is the video visually appealing?
- Consider color, composition, and overall look
**Text-Video Alignment:**
- Does the video match the given text prompt?
- Are all described elements present?
### Pairwise Comparison:
- When two videos are shown, compare them holistically
- Consider all quality dimensions together
### Temporal Quality Marking:
- Flag specific moments where quality drops (red)
- Mark segments of exceptional quality (green)
- Highlight visible artifacts (yellow)
### Tips:
- Watch each video at least twice before rating
- Pay attention to edges and fine details for artifacts
- Compare motion to real-world physics
- Read the prompt carefully before rating alignment
Sample Datasample-data.json
[
{
"id": "vbench_001",
"video_url": "https://example.com/videos/gen_sunset_beach_modelA.mp4",
"prompt": "A golden sunset over a calm ocean beach with gentle waves rolling onto the sand",
"model_name": "ModelA-v2",
"video_url_b": "https://example.com/videos/gen_sunset_beach_modelB.mp4"
},
{
"id": "vbench_002",
"video_url": "https://example.com/videos/gen_city_rain_modelA.mp4",
"prompt": "A bustling city street at night during heavy rain with neon reflections on wet pavement",
"model_name": "ModelA-v2",
"video_url_b": "https://example.com/videos/gen_city_rain_modelB.mp4"
}
]
// ... and 8 more itemsGet This Design
Clone or download from the repository
Quick start:
git clone https://github.com/davidjurgens/potato-showcase.git cd potato-showcase/video/vbench-generation-quality potato start config.yaml
Dataset & paper
Huang et al., CVPR 2024
Citation (BibTeX)
@inproceedings{huang2024vbench,
title={VBench: Comprehensive Benchmark Suite for Video Generative Models},
author={Huang, Ziqi and He, Yinan and Yu, Jiashuo and Zhang, Fan and Si, Chenyang and Jiang, Yuming and Zhang, Yuanhan and Wu, Tianxing and Jin, Qingyang and Chanpaisit, Nattapol and others},
booktitle={Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition},
year={2024}
}Details
Annotation Types
Domain
Use Cases
Tags
Found an issue or want to improve this design?
Open an IssueRelated Designs
TVSum Video Summarization
Frame-level importance scoring for video summarization. Annotators rate 2-second shots on a 1-5 importance scale to identify key moments worth including in a summary.
RT-2 - Robotic Action Annotation
Robotic manipulation task evaluation and action segmentation based on RT-2 (Brohan et al., CoRL 2023). Annotators evaluate task success, describe actions, rate execution quality, and segment video into action phases.
T2I-CompBench: Compositional Text-to-Image Benchmark
T2I-CompBench is a 6,000-prompt benchmark for compositional text-to-image generation (Huang et al., NeurIPS 2023). This Potato config reproduces its human eval: Likert ratings, challenge-type tagging, and pairwise comparison.