kkkcx/MM-OCEAN
alternative
Maintenance: Active
Confidence: Low
Reproducibility: Limited
Matched via arXiv identifier search
- Stars
- 11
- Last push
- May 24, 2026 (27d ago)
Risk flags
- No CI pipeline detected
- No tagged releases
- No Docker setup
Perception or Prejudice: Can MLLMs Go Beyond First Impressions of Personality?
Caixin Kang, Tianyu Yan, Sitong Gong, Mingfang Zhang, Liangyang Ouyang, Ruicong Liu, Bo Zheng, Huchuan Lu, Kaipeng Zhang, Yoichi Sato, Yifei Huang
Published: May 21, 2026
No direct implementation yet
Evidence: Inferred
Domain fit: AI-core
Verified repos: 0
Core AI workload signals detected from paper context and implementation/artifact evidence.
Time to first repro: a few days
2 risk flags
Copied
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly deployed in human-facing roles where personality perception is critical, yet existing benchmarks evaluate this capability solely on numerical Big Five score prediction, leaving open whether models truly perceive personality through behavioral understanding or merely prejudge through superficial pattern matching. We address this gap with three contributions. (i ...
) A new task: we formalize Grounded Personality Reasoning (GPR), which requires MLLMs to anchor each Big Five rating in observable evidence through a chain of rating, reasoning, and grounding. (ii) A new dataset: we release MM-OCEAN (1,104 videos, 5,320 MCQs), produced by a multi-agent pipeline with human verification, with timestamped behavioral observations, evidence-grounded trait analyses, and seven categories of cue-grounding MCQs. (iii) Benchmark and analysis: we design a three-tier evaluation (rating, reasoning, grounding) plus four sample-level failure-mode metrics: Prejudice Rate (PR), Confabulation Rate (CR), Integration-failure Rate (IR), and Holistic-grounding Rate (HR), and benchmark 27 MLLMs (13 closed, 14 open). The analysis uncovers a striking Prejudice Gap: across the field, 51% of correct ratings are not grounded in retrieved cues, and the Holistic-Grounding Rate spans only 0-33.5%. These findings expose a disconnect between getting the right score and reasoning for the right reason, charting a roadmap for grounded social cognition in MLLMs.
Canonical key: arxiv-2605.22109
Cache status: Fresh
Generated at: Jun 19, 2026, 9:22 PM
Artifact coverage: sparse
HF provider: ok (token)
PWC source used: No
LLM status: not_generated
LLM model: n/a
LLM generated: Unknown
LLM content type: n/a
HF policy: hf-relevance-v27
context only
Benchmarks: missing
Time to repro: a few days
2 risk flags
Results & Benchmarks
Freshness tier: hot
Direct + Inferred Evidence
No concrete benchmark grounding is available yet. Treat the page as context or an implementation starting point only.
Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly deployed in human-facing roles where personality perception is critical, yet existing benchmarks evaluate this capability solely on numerical Big Five score prediction, leaving open whether models truly perceive personality through behavioral understanding or merely prejudge through superficial pattern matching.
Implementation Evidence Summary
Confidence: low
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
Reproduction Risks
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Hardware Notes
Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Evidence disclosure
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation Comparison
Top 1 paths
Compare maintenance quality, reproducibility coverage, and evidence confidence before choosing a reproduction baseline.
Implementation Status
No verified maintained repo
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Reproduction readiness
No Repo
Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Jun 19, 2026
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
No verified implementation available
- · No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
No benchmark numbers could be verified. You will not be able to validate reproduction correctness against published numbers.
Additional implementations
No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.
These repositories had low-confidence matching signals and are hidden by default.
- kkkcx/MM-OCEAN Confidence: LowStars: 11
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet.
Continue with targeted Hugging Face searches derived from the paper title and method context:
Datasets
Spaces
Tip: start with models, then check datasets/spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Direct artifact matches are currently sparse. Use targeted Hugging Face searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Research context
Tasks
Agentic tool use, Scientific computing
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Natural Language Processing, AI Agents
Evaluation & Human Feedback Data
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXExplore Similar Papers
Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.
Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.