← Latest papers
🤖 machine learning

Conditional Vendi Score: Prompt-Aware Diversity Evaluation for Generative AI Models and LLMs

This paper introduces Conditional-Vendi and Conditional-RKE, novel diversity metrics that isolate model-induced variability from prompt-induced effects in generative AI, enabling more accurate evaluation and guidance of diversity in text-to-image, image-captioning, and LLM tasks.

Original authors: Mohammad Jalali, Azim Ospanov, Amin Gohari, Farzan Farnia

Published 2026-06-10
📖 5 min read🧠 Deep dive

Original authors: Mohammad Jalali, Azim Ospanov, Amin Gohari, Farzan Farnia

Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer

The Core Problem: The "Restaurant Menu" Confusion

Imagine you are reviewing a restaurant. You want to know if the chef is creative (diverse) or if they just serve the same dish over and over.

  • Old Way (Unconditional Metrics): You look at all the plates served in a day. If the menu has "Steak," "Salad," and "Soup," the restaurant looks very diverse.
  • The Problem: In modern AI, we don’t just ask for "food." We give specific orders (prompts). If you ask for "Steak," the chef serves steak. If you ask for "Salad," they serve salad.
  • The Confusion: Old metrics see the Steak and the Salad and say, "Wow, this chef is so diverse!" But they are ignoring the fact that the customer asked for different things. The chef might have served the exact same steak every time you asked for steak. That’s not creative; that’s just obedient.

The paper argues that we need to separate Prompt-Induced Diversity (variety caused by different orders) from Model-Induced Diversity (variety caused by the chef’s own creativity when given the same order).

The Solution: The "Conditional Vendi Score"

The authors created new measuring tools called Conditional-Vendi and Conditional-RKE. Think of these as "Smart Scorecards" that know what the order was.

1. How It Works (The Math Made Simple)

In math, "entropy" is a measure of randomness or surprise.

  • Vendi Score: Measures how "surprising" or varied the outputs are overall.
  • Conditional-Vendi: Measures how surprising the outputs are given that we already know the prompt.

The Analogy:
Imagine a magician.

  • Unconditional Score: You watch the magician pull a rabbit, then a dove, then a coin. You say, "Wow, lots of different animals!"
  • Conditional Score: You know the magician always pulls a rabbit when you say "Rabbit." If you say "Rabbit" five times, and he pulls a white rabbit, a black rabbit, a fluffy rabbit, and a hairless rabbit, that is high conditional diversity. If he pulls the exact same white rabbit every time, his conditional diversity is low, even though the overall show looked varied because you asked for different tricks.

The paper uses a mathematical trick involving Kernel Matrices (which measure how similar two items are) and Hadamard Products (a way of combining the similarity of the text prompt with the similarity of the image/output). This allows the score to "subtract out" the variety that comes from the text, leaving only the variety that comes from the AI model itself.

2. The "Truncated" Fix (Making It Fast)

Calculating the full Vendi score is computationally expensive—it’s like trying to count every grain of sand on a beach. It gets slower as the data gets bigger.

  • The Fix: The authors introduced a "Truncated" version. Instead of counting every grain of sand, they just count the biggest handfuls.
  • Why it matters: This makes the score fast enough to use on large datasets without losing accuracy. They proved mathematically that this shortcut still gives a reliable result.

What Did They Find? (The Experiments)

The authors tested their new scores on Text-to-Image models (like DALL-E or Stable Diffusion), Video models, and Large Language Models (LLMs).

1. The "Dog and Bird" Test

  • Scenario A: The prompts were all very similar ("A dog and a bird..."), but the AI generated different breeds, colors, and poses.
  • Scenario B: The prompts were very different ("A dog racing," "A dog stargazing," "A dog watching snow"), but the AI used the same generic dog and bird in every picture.
  • Old Metrics: Gave a higher diversity score to Scenario B because the scenes were different.
  • New Conditional Metrics: Gave a higher diversity score to Scenario A. Why? Because the AI was being creative with the subjects despite the similar prompts. This is the "true" model diversity.

2. The "Animal Type" Test

  • They asked an AI to generate images of animals.
  • Group 1: Prompts said "An animal is rolling in the grass." (Unspecified)
  • Group 2: Prompts said "A fox is rolling in the grass." (Specified)
  • Result: The Conditional-Vendi score was much higher for Group 1. This makes sense: when the prompt is vague, the AI has to decide what animal to draw, so it shows more internal variety. When the prompt specifies "fox," the AI is constrained, so its internal variety drops. The old metrics couldn't tell this difference as clearly.

3. LLMs and Temperature

  • They tested text generators (LLMs) with different "temperatures" (a setting that controls randomness).
  • As they increased the temperature (making the AI more random), the Conditional-Vendi score went up. This confirms the score correctly detects when the model is becoming more diverse in its writing style, independent of the topic.

Can We Use This to Make Better AI?

Yes. The paper shows that you can use this score not just to judge AI, but to guide it.

  • The Method: During the image generation process, the AI can be nudged to maximize the Conditional-Vendi score.
  • The Result: Images generated with this "guidance" were more diverse in their details (like background elements or specific features) while still staying true to the prompt. It’s like telling the chef, "Make sure this steak looks different from the last one, even though the order is the same."

Summary

  • Old Metrics: Confused "different orders" with "creative cooking."
  • New Metrics (Conditional-Vendi/RKE): Separate the two. They measure how creative the AI is for a specific request.
  • Benefit: Gives a fairer comparison of AI models. A model that generates unique variations for the same prompt is now correctly identified as "more diverse" than a model that just changes the scene based on the prompt.
  • Practicality: The "Truncated" version makes it fast enough to use in real-world applications, including helping AI generate more varied content.

Drowning in papers in your field?

Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.

Try Digest →