Paper detail

BBQ-V: Benchmarking Visual Stereotype Bias in Large Multimodal Models

Stereotype biases in Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) perpetuate harmful societal prejudices, undermining the fairness and equity of AI applications. As LMMs grow increasingly influential, addressing and mitigating inherent biases related to stereotypes, harmful generations, and ambiguous assumptions in real-world scenarios has become essential. However, existing datasets evaluating stereotype biases in LMMs often lack diversity, rely on synthetic images, and often have single-actor images, leaving a gap in bias evaluation for real-world visual contexts. To address the gap in bias evaluation using real images, we introduce the BBQ-Vision (BBQ-V), the most comprehensive framework for assessing stereotype biases across nine diverse categories and 50 sub-categories with real and multi-actor images. BBQ-V benchmark contains 14,144 image-question pairs and rigorously evaluates LMMs through carefully curated, visually grounded scenarios, challenging them to reason accurately about visual stereotypes. It offers a robust evaluation framework featuring real-world visual samples, image variations, and open-ended question formats. BBQ-V enables a precise and nuanced assessment of a model's reasoning capabilities across varying levels of difficulty. Through rigorous testing of 19 state-of-the-art open-source (general-purpose and reasoning) and closed-source LMMs, we highlight that these top-performing models are often biased on several social stereotypes, and demonstrate that the thinking models induce more bias in the reasoning chains. This benchmark represents a significant step toward fostering fairness in AI systems and reducing harmful biases, laying the groundwork for more equitable and socially responsible LMMs. Our dataset and evaluation code are publicly available.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.