In manga translation, visual context outside speech-bubble text, including speaker identities, referents, and scene tone, is depicted in page images, making it natural to refer to images during translation evaluation. However, most conventional manga translation evaluations rely solely on text-only automatic metrics, leaving the impact of image input insufficiently explored. We propose a practical validation framework that employs the same vision-language model (VLM) as both a text-only judge (TOJ) and an image-aware judge (IAJ) to investigate evaluation divergences associated with image-aware evaluation procedures. We use a Japanese-English manga dataset of official translations aligned at the page and speech-bubble levels. First, adding page images to TOJ improved the primary VLM's detection of deliberately injected, visually dependent degradations. Second, we analyzed evaluation divergences between TOJ and IAJ, finding different error counts and error-category distributions. Human verification did not reveal a consistent preference between TOJ and IAJ.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of the proposed validation framework.
Degradation Type
Description
speaker_or_ addressee
Confuses speaker or addressee, shifting subjects or honorifics
referent_or_ object
Translates referenced objects/entities in image as something else
tone_emotion_or_ style
Translates with tone or style contradicting facial expression or scene
action_or_ state
Translates with actions or physical states contradicting depicted artwork
Table 1: Degradation operation types used in Experiment 1 to create translations contradicting manga page image content.
Condition
Page Image
Grounding
Mean (%)
5-run Range (%)
Mean flags
TOJ
None
None
57.9%
56.0–58.7%
1.11
IAJ-blank
Blank image
Yes
52.0%
50.7–53.3%
1.03
IAJ-minimal
Actual page
None
81.6%
80.0–82.7%
1.40
IAJ-full
Actual page
Yes
80.5%
78.7–82.7%
1.20
Table 2: Experiment 1 results. Semantic match rates are summarized by their mean and range across five runs. Mean flags denotes the average number of reported errors per instance.
Semantic match rate
Mean flags
MQM Judge
TOJ
IAJ-full
Difference
TOJ
IAJ-full
gemini-3-flash-preview
57.9% (56.0–58.7)
80.5% (78.7–82.7)
+22.7 pp
1.11
1.20
gpt-5.4-mini
24.8% (24.0–25.3)
30.7% (30.7–30.7)
+5.9 pp
1.05
0.89
qwen3-vl-32b-instruct
45.6% (44.0–48.0)
59.2% (57.3–61.3)
+13.6 pp
1.43
1.53
Table 3: Experiment 1 cross-model comparison. Semantic match rates are five-run means with ranges in parentheses. Differences are IAJ-full minus TOJ, computed before rounding. Mean flags is defined as in Table 2 .
Figure 2: Representative example ( bj_vol1_113 ) of degraded translation contradicting manga image content missed by TOJ but detected by IAJ-full. Left: JA/EN page images; Right: degraded segment, degradation intent, and IAJ-full error explanation. The EN page image is shown for illustration only and was not provided to IAJ. The patient’s beard and the doctor’s face clarify the referent error changing “HIS” to “MY”. Give My Regards to Black Jack / SHUHO SATO
Metric
TOJ
IAJ-full
All 180 Pages
Total error flags
318
262
Mean / page
1.77
1.46
Major error flags
36
24
Mean major / page
0.20
0.13
Minor error flags
268
233
Table 4: Automatic evaluation results reported by judges on official translations across 180 pages (based on gemini-3-flash-preview ). The table includes total error flags, severity counts, mean model-reported quality_score , and mean score deficit ( 100−Sp ). Total error flags include major , minor , and neutral .
Category
TOJ-only
IAJ-only
TOJ-only Share
Overall
152
96
61.3%
meaning_accuracy
42
32
56.8%
naturalness_and_register
30
19
61.2%
omission_or_addition
31
17
64.6%
tone_and_emotion
19
10
65.5%
terminology_and_named_entities
20
12
62.5%
Table 5: Breakdown of TOJ/IAJ unique error flags by MQM category across 180 pages.
Metric
Value
Annotators / Verified Pages
6 / 40
Individual votes ( n=240 )
Prefer IAJ / TOJ / Tie
73 / 87 / 80
Percentage
30.4 / 36.3 / 33.3%
Medium or high confidence
228 (95.0%)
Mean Pairwise Agreement
0.512
Table 6: Experiment 2: Main judgment agreement and page-level consensus among 6 annotators over 40 TOJ/IAJ-full MQM outputs.
Output validity ( n=240 each)
TOJ
IAJ
Count (%)
Count (%)
Valid
168 (70.0)
172 (71.7)
Partially valid
46 (19.2)
28 (11.7)
Invalid
15 (6.3)
12 (5.0)
Unclear
11 (4.6)
28 (11.7)
Valid or partially valid
214 (89.2)
200 (83.3)
Table 7: Experiment 2 human ratings. Left: output validity and reasons for ties. Right: perceived image usefulness and observed effects on IAJ outputs. Values are counts with percentages in parentheses. IAJ denotes IAJ-full. Positive effects include valid detection, overflagging prevention, or rationale strengthening; negative effects include visual misrecognition/overinterpretation or missed textual issues. Effects are counted per response, with two responses reporting both positive and negative effects.
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Item
Value
Base Dataset
Target Manga Work
Give My Regards to Black Jack Vol. 1
Page Images (JA)
196
Page Images (EN)
196
Pages with Established Segment Alignment
180
Total Segment Count (180 pages)
974
Appendix
Table 8: Dataset statistics.
Run
TOJ (%)
IAJ-min. (%)
Diff (pp)
TOJ-only
IAJ-min.-only
McNemar p
Cluster p
Cluster 95% CI
1
58.7%
81.3%
+22.7
2
19
0.000221
0.000740
[+11.0, +36.1]
2
58.7%
80.0%
+21.3
2
18
0.000403
0.001700
[+8.3, +35.1]
3
56.0%
81.3%
+25.3
1
20
<0.0001
<0.0001
[+13.3, +38.6]
4
57.3%
82.7%
+25.3
1
20
<0.0001
<0.0001
[+13.9, +37.8]
5
58.7%
82.7%
+24.0
1
19
<0.0001
0.000390
[+11.5, +37.7]
Appendix
Table 9: Significance test results for TOJ vs. IAJ-minimal in Experiment 1. Differences per run are percentage-point differences (IAJ-minimal − TOJ). “TOJ-only detected” indicates instances detected only by TOJ; “IAJ-min.-only detected” indicates instances detected only by IAJ-minimal, aggregated across 75 paired degraded translation instances. McNemar p provides exact instance-level paired reference values. Cluster p represents sign-flip test p -values over 54 page-level clusters, and Cluster 95% confidence interval (CI) reflects bootstrap confidence intervals resampling source pages.
Figure 3: Representative examples ( bj_vol1_114 , bj_vol1_116 ) of degraded translations contradicting manga image content in Experiment 1. Format matches Figure 2 (JA/EN page images + degraded segment + degradation intent + IAJ-full error explanation). The EN page images are shown for illustration only and were not provided to IAJ. Give My Regards to Black Jack / SHUHO SATO
Figure 4: Annotation UI screenshot. Left panel: JA/EN page images and comparison of source and translation segments. Middle panel: TOJ/IAJ flags. Right panel: annotation fields including main judgment ( prefer_IAJ / prefer_TOJ / tie ), confidence, page-level output validity, image effect, image usefulness, and comments. Images expand on click.
Model
Condition
Pearson r
Spearman ρ
gemini-3-flash-preview (Main)
TOJ
0.402
0.762
gemini-3-flash-preview (Main)
IAJ-full
0.348
0.717
gpt-5.4-mini (Auxiliary)
TOJ
0.557
0.873
gpt-5.4-mini (Auxiliary)
IAJ-full
0.752
0.881
qwen3-vl-32b-instruct (Auxiliary)
TOJ
0.467
0.803
qwen3-vl-32b-instruct (Auxiliary)
IAJ-full
0.391
0.693
Appendix
Table 10: Page-level correlation between quality_score and sign-flipped normalized MQM penalty ( −Epword ). Each model and condition has n=180 ; pooled values have n=1080 .
Model
IAJ Higher
TOJ Higher
Tied
Mean IAJ
Mean TOJ
Mean Diff
gemini-3-flash-preview
81 (45.0%)
32 (17.8%)
67 (37.2%)
91.9
89.8
+2.2
gpt-5.4-mini
90 (50.0%)
43 (23.9%)
47 (26.1%)
87.9
86.4
+1.5
qwen3-vl-32b-instruct
102 (56.7%)
24 (13.3%)
54 (30.0%)
85.5
80.1
+5.4
Appendix
Table 11: Experiment 2 score summary across the primary and auxiliary models. For 180 official translation pages, the table shows page counts where the IAJ-full model-reported score exceeded TOJ, vice versa, ties, and mean model-reported scores ( quality_score ). Mean difference reflects average unrounded score difference (IAJ − TOJ).
Metric
gpt TOJ
gpt IAJ-full
qwen TOJ
qwen IAJ-full
All 180 Pages
Total error flags
463
444
568
547
Mean / page
2.57
2.47
3.16
3.04
Major error flags
136
123
212
146
Mean major / page
0.76
0.68
1.18
0.81
Minor error flags
301
285
348
375
Appendix
Table 12: Error volume reported by auxiliary models on 180 official translation pages. Total error flags include major , minor , and neutral . gpt represents gpt-5.4-mini ; qwen represents qwen3-vl-32b-instruct .
Metric / Page Group
Value / Pages
Micro-Average Coverage (166 / 318 flags)
52.2%
Page-Level Macro-Average Coverage (n=160)
53.1%
Page-Level Median Coverage
50.0%
100% Coverage (Fully Retained) Pages
54 pages (33.8%)
Partial Coverage ( 0<cp<1 ) Pages
61 pages (38.1%)
0% Coverage (Fully Suppressed) Pages
45 pages (28.1%)
Appendix
Table 13: Coverage of TOJ error flags by IAJ-full and page-level distributions.
Reliable evaluation is essential for the development of vision-language models (VLMs). However, Japanese VQA benchmarks have undergone far less iterative refinement than their English counterparts. As a result, many existing benchmarks contain issues such as ambiguous questions, incorrect answers, and instances that can be solved without visual grounding, undermining evaluation reliability and leading to misleading conclusions in model comparisons. To address these limitations, we introduce JAMMEval, a refined collection of Japanese benchmarks for reliable VLM evaluation. It is constructed by systematically refining seven existing Japanese benchmark datasets through two rounds of human annotation, improving both data quality and evaluation reliability. In our experiments, we evaluate open-weight and proprietary VLMs on JAMMEval and analyze the capabilities of recent models on Japanese VQA. We further demonstrate the effectiveness of our refinement by showing that the resulting benchmarks yield evaluation scores that better reflect model capability, exhibit lower run-to-run variance, and improve the ability to distinguish between models of different capability levels. We release our dataset and code to advance reliable evaluation of VLMs.
Issa Sugiura, Koki Maeda, Shuhei Kurita +3
Kyoto University · NII LLMC · Institute of Science Tokyo +2
Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly used in place of human annotators, making it important that substitutability tests reflect the model rather than incidental evaluation conditions. We introduce MIST, the Misleading-Image Stress Test: 200 English sentences, each built around a phrase readable either figuratively or literally and shown with an aligned image depicting its reading, a misleading image depicting the opposite, or no image at all. The guidelines require the label to be decided from the sentence alone, so no image should change any answer. We expected each image to pull a judge's labels toward the sense it depicts, and neither kind did. Across thirteen VLM judges, an aligned image changed 20.5% of labels and a misleading one 19.4%, close for every judge and both above the 11.6% produced by deleting the ignore-the-image instruction with the image left in place. Yet only 37% of the labels that differ between the two images moved toward the sense shown, and agreement with our human annotators is unchanged whether the image is absent, aligned or misleading. The effect is smaller in the seven judges that pass the alt-test than in the six that never do, but present in all of them: what moves a judge is that an image is there, not which of the two it is, so a substitutability verdict describes a configuration as much as a model.
A system that enables blind or visually impaired users to access comics/manga would introduce a new medium of storytelling to this community. However, no such system currently exists. Generative vision-language models (VLMs) have shown promise in describing images and understanding comics, but most research on comic understanding is limited to panel-level analysis. To fully support blind and visually impaired users, greater attention must be paid to page-level understanding and interpretation. In this work, we present a preliminary benchmark of VLM performance on comic interpretation tasks. We identify and categorize hallucinations that emerge during this process, organizing them into generalized object-hallucination taxonomies. We conclude with guidance on future research, emphasizing hallucination mitigation and improved data curation for comic interpretation.
Christopher Driggers-Ellis, Nachiketh Tibrewal, Rohit Bogulla +4