--- pretty_name: TextEdit-Bench license: mit task_categories: - image-to-image tags: - computer-vision - image-editing - benchmark configs: - config_name: default data_files: - split: train path: metadata.jsonl dataset_info: features: - name: original_image dtype: image - name: gt_image dtype: image - name: id dtype: int64 - name: category dtype: string - name: source_text dtype: string - name: target_text dtype: string - name: prompt dtype: string - name: gt_caption dtype: string ---
# TextEdit: A High-Quality, Multi-Scenario Text Editing Benchmark for Generation Models

Coming Soon GitHub Repo [Danni Yang](https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=qDsgBJAAAAAJ&hl=zh-CN&oi=sra), [Sitao Chen](https://github.com/fudan-chen), [Changyao Tian](https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=kQ3AisQAAAAJ&hl=zh-CN&oi=ao) If you find our work helpful, please give us a ⭐ or cite our paper. See the InternVL-U technical report appendix for more details.

## 🎉 News - **[2026/03/06]** TextEdit benchmark released. - **[2026/03/06]** Evaluation code and initial baselines released. - **[2026/03/06]** Leaderboard updated with latest models. ## 📖 Introduction Text editing is a fundamental yet challenging capability for modern image generation and editing models. An increasing number of powerful multimodal generation models, such as Qwen-Image and Nano-Banana-Pro, are emerging with strong text rendering and editing capabilities. For text editing task, unlike general image editing, text manipulation requires: - Precise spatial alignment - Font and style consistency - Background preservation - Layout-constrained reasoning We introduce **TextEdit**, a **high-quality**, **multi-scenario benchmark** designed to evaluate **fine-grained text editing capabilities** in image generation models. TextEdit covers a diverse set of real-world and virtual scenarios, spanning **18 subcategories** with a total of **2,148 high-quality source images** and **manually annotated edited ground-truth images**. To comprehensively assess model performance, we combine **classic OCR, image-fidelity metrics and modern multimodal LLM-based evaluation** across _target accuracy_, _text preservation_, _scene integrity_, _local realism_ and _visual coherence_. This dual-track protocol enables comprehensive assessment. Our goal is to provide a **standardized, realistic, and scalable** benchmark for text editing research. --- ## 🏆 LeadBoard
📊 Full Benchmark Results
Models # Params Real Virtual
OA OP OR F1 NED CLIP AES OA OP OR F1 NED CLIP AES
Generation Models
Qwen-Image-Edit 20B 0.750.680.660.670.710.755.72 0.780.750.730.740.750.815.21
GPT-Image-1.5 - 0.740.690.670.680.680.755.78 0.730.720.710.710.700.805.28
Nano Banana Pro - 0.770.720.700.710.720.755.79 0.800.780.770.780.780.815.28
Unified Models
Lumina-DiMOO 8B 0.220.230.190.200.190.695.53 0.220.250.210.220.200.724.76
Ovis-U1 2.4B+1.2B 0.400.370.340.350.350.725.32 0.370.400.380.390.330.754.66
BAGEL 7B+7B 0.600.590.530.550.550.745.71 0.570.600.560.570.540.785.19
InternVL-U 2B+1.7B 0.770.730.700.710.720.755.70 0.790.770.750.750.770.805.12
Models # Params Real Virtual
TA TP SI LR VC Avg TA TP SI LR VC Avg
Generation Models
Qwen-Image-Edit 20B 0.920.820.750.570.800.77 0.570.790.920.800.770.77
GPT-Image-1.5 - 0.960.940.860.800.930.90 0.820.930.960.910.870.90
Nano Banana Pro - 0.960.950.850.880.930.91 0.870.920.960.940.890.92
Unified Models
Lumina-DiMOO 8B 0.170.060.040.020.050.09 0.020.060.160.050.030.08
Ovis-U1 2.4B+1.2B 0.310.120.120.070.180.18 0.060.160.310.140.130.19
BAGEL 7B+7B 0.680.600.380.350.560.53 0.380.510.680.620.420.54
InternVL-U 2B+1.7B 0.940.900.710.800.800.88 0.870.860.910.820.620.83
📊 Mini-set Benchmark Results(500 samples)
Models # Params Real Virtual
OA OP OR F1 NED CLIP AES OA OP OR F1 NED CLIP AES
Generation Models
Qwen-Image-Edit 20B 0.760.690.670.670.700.755.81 0.740.710.700.700.700.805.27
GPT-Image-1.5 - 0.720.680.660.670.670.755.85 0.680.690.680.680.650.805.32
Nano Banana Pro - 0.760.710.690.700.700.755.86 0.770.760.750.750.760.815.32
Unified Models
Lumina-DiMOO 8B 0.200.220.180.190.190.705.58 0.220.250.210.220.190.734.87
Ovis-U1 2.4B+1.2B 0.370.340.320.320.330.725.39 0.390.410.380.390.330.744.75
BAGEL 7B+7B 0.610.590.520.540.540.745.79 0.530.580.530.550.510.785.25
InternVL-U 2B+1.7B 0.770.740.700.710.710.765.79 0.740.720.690.700.720.795.14
Models # Params Real Virtual
TA TP SI LR VC Avg TA TP SI LR VC Avg
Generation Models
Qwen-Image-Edit 20B 0.930.850.770.550.780.80 0.600.820.910.810.740.76
GPT-Image-1.5 - 0.970.940.860.790.920.91 0.850.930.950.920.830.88
Nano Banana Pro - 0.960.950.850.860.920.91 0.870.920.960.930.870.92
Unified Models
Lumina-DiMOO 8B 0.160.040.040.020.060.08 0.020.050.190.070.030.10
Ovis-U1 2.4B+1.2B 0.290.110.110.080.200.17 0.040.160.350.180.150.22
BAGEL 7B+7B 0.680.610.380.340.590.53 0.360.520.690.640.400.54
InternVL-U 2B+1.7B 0.940.910.720.730.750.89 0.880.870.900.780.570.79
## 🛠️ Quick Start ### 📂 1. Data Preparation You can download images from [this page](https://huggingface.co/collections/OpenGVLab/TextEdit). The TextEdit benchmark data is organized under `data/` by and category: - **Virtual** (categories `1.x.x`): Synthetic/virtual scene images - **Real** (categories `2.x`): Real-world scene images Evaluation prompts are provided under `eval_prompts/` in two subsets: | Subset | Directory | Description | |--------|-----------|-------------| | **Fullset** | `eval_prompts/fullset/` | Complete benchmark with all samples | | **Miniset (500)** | `eval_prompts/miniset/` | 500-sample subset uniformly sampled from the fullset | Each `.jsonl` file contains per-sample fields: `id`, `prompt`, `original_image`, `gt_image`, `source_text`, `target_text`, `gt_caption`. ### 🤖 2. Model Output Preparation You need to use your model to perform image editing inference process. Please organize the outputs in the folder structure shown below to facilitate evaluation. ``` output/ ├── internvl-u/ # Your Model Name │ ├── 1.1.1 # Category Name │ ├── 1007088003726.0.jpg # Model Output Images │ ├── 1013932004096.0.jpg │ ├── ... │ ├── 1.1.2 │ ├── 1.1.3 │ ├── ... │ └── 2.7 ``` ### 📏 3. Model Evaluation #### 3.1 Classic Metrics Evaluation Classic metrics evaluate text editing quality using **OCR-based text accuracy**, **image-text alignment**, and **aesthetic quality**. All metrics are reported separately for **Virtual** and **Real** splits. #### Evaluated Metrics | Abbreviation | Metric | Description | |:---:|---|---| | **OA** | OCR Accuracy | Whether the target text is correctly rendered in the editing region | | **OP** | OCR Precision | Precision of text content (target + background) in the generated image | | **OR** | OCR Recall | Recall of text content (target + background) in the generated image | | **F1** | OCR F1 | Harmonic mean of OCR Precision and Recall | | **NED** | Normalized Edit Distance | ROI-aware normalized edit distance between target and generated text | | **CLIP** | CLIPScore | CLIP-based image-text alignment score | | **AES** | Aesthetic Score | Predicted aesthetic quality score of the generated image | #### Usage Evaluation scripts are provided separately for **fullset** and **miniset**: - `eval_scripts/classic_metrics_eval_full.sh` — evaluate on the full benchmark - `eval_scripts/classic_metrics_eval_mini.sh` — evaluate on the 500-sample miniset **Step 1. Modify the contents of the configure script according to your project directory.** (e.g., `eval_scripts/classic_metrics_eval_full.sh`): ```bash MODELS="model-a,model-b,model-c" # Comma-separated list of model names to be evaluated path="your_project_path_here" CACHE_DIR="$path/TextEdit/checkpoint" # Directory for all model checkpoints (OCR, CLIP, etc.) BENCHMARK_DIR="$path/TextEdit/eval_prompts/fullset" GT_ROOT_DIR="$path/TextEdit/data" # Root path for original & GT images MODEL_OUTPUT_ROOT="$path/TextEdit/output" # Root path for model infer outputs OUTPUT_DIR="$path/TextEdit/result/classic_fullset" # Evaluation result root path for classic metric ``` > **Note:** All required model checkpoints (PaddleOCR, CLIP, aesthetic model, etc.) should be placed under the **`CACHE_DIR`** directory. **Step 2.Run evaluation shell script to evaluate your model output.** ```bash # Fullset evaluation bash eval_scripts/classic_metrics_eval_full.sh # Miniset evaluation bash eval_scripts/classic_metrics_eval_mini.sh ``` Results are saved as `{model_name}.json` under the output directory, containing per-sample scores and aggregated metrics for both **Virtual** and **Real** splits. --- #### 3.2 VLM-based Metrics Evaluation Our VLM-based evaluation uses **Gemini-3-Pro-Preview** as an expert judge to score text editing quality across five fine-grained dimensions. The evaluation is a **two-step pipeline**. #### Evaluated Metrics | Abbreviation | Metric | Description | |:---:|---|---| | **TA** | Text Accuracy | Spelling correctness and completeness of the target text (1–5) | | **TP** | Text Preservation | Preservation of non-target background text (1–5) | | **SI** | Scene Integrity | Geometric stability of non-edited background areas (1–5) | | **LR** | Local Realism | Inpainting quality, edge cleanness, and seamlessness (1–5) | | **VC** | Visual Coherence | Style matching (font, lighting, shadow, texture harmony) (1–5) | | **Avg** | Weighted Average | Weighted average of all five dimensions (default weights: 0.4 / 0.3 / 0.1 / 0.1 / 0.1) | All raw scores (1–5) are normalized to 0–1 for reporting. A **cutoff mechanism** is available: if TA (Q1) < 4, the remaining dimensions are set to 0, reflecting that a failed text edit invalidates other quality dimensions. #### Step 1: Gemini API Evaluation Send (Original Image, GT Image, Edited Image) triplets to the Gemini API for scoring. Configure and run `eval_scripts/vlm_metrics_eval_step1.sh`: ```bash API_KEY="your_gemini_api_key_here" BASE_URL="your_gemini_api_base_url_here" python eval_pipeline/vlm_metrics_eval_step1.py \ --input_data_dir /TextEdit/eval_prompts/fullset \ --model_output_root /TextEdit/output \ --gt_data_root /TextEdit/data \ --output_base_dir /TextEdit/result/vlm_gemini_full_answers \ --model_name "gemini-3-pro-preview" \ --models "model-a,model-b,model-c" \ --api_key "$API_KEY" \ --base_url "$BASE_URL" \ --num_workers 64 ``` Per-model `.jsonl` answer files are saved under the `output_base_dir`. #### Step 2: Score Aggregation & Report Aggregate the per-sample Gemini responses into a final report. Configure and run `eval_scripts/vlm_metrics_eval_step2.sh`: ```bash # Fullset report python eval_pipeline/vlm_metrics_eval_step2.py \ --answer_dir /TextEdit/result/vlm_gemini_full_answers \ --output_file /TextEdit/result/gemini_report_fullset.json \ --weights 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 \ --enable_cutoff # Miniset report python eval_pipeline/vlm_metrics_eval_step2.py \ --answer_dir /TextEdit/result/vlm_gemini_mini_answers \ --output_file /TextEdit/result/gemini_report_miniset.json \ --weights 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 \ --enable_cutoff ``` **Key parameters:** - `--weights`: Weights for Q1–Q5 (default: `0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1`). - `--enable_cutoff`: Enable cutoff mechanism — if Q1 < 4, set Q2–Q5 to 0. The output includes a JSON report, a CSV table, and a Markdown-formatted leaderboard printed to the console. --- ## 🎨 Visualization Ouput Example ## Citation If you find TextEdit Bench useful, please cite our technical report InternVL-U using this BibTeX.