\(\bullet\)_Evaluation perspectives._ The evaluation tasks for MLLMs can be categorized into two main types: _perception_ and _cognition_ tasks. Specifically, _perception_ tasks aim to assess the model's abilities in understanding the basic semantics of the image content, while _cognition_ tasks evaluate models with more complex tasks that require reasoning based on perception results. The perception ability is typically evaluated through classification tasks about attributes of image (_e.g._, topic and style) and object (_e.g._, existence and color) or OCR-related tasks, based on existing datasets or new datasets derived from existing images with annotations by humans or LLMs [836, 837, 838, 839]. A notable perception issue is hallucination [840], where the model's responses contain inconsistent content with the image. Among existing studies about hallucination in MLLMs [841, 834, 842], object hallucination [843] has received much research attention. To conduct a stable, robust evaluation of object hallucination, POPE [844] proposes a polling-based object probing approach for converting object recognition into a series of binary questions, and the results indicate that current MLLMs often struggle with object hallucination. Cognition tasks, on the other hand, require MLLMs to perform reasoning based on image perception. A common reasoning task is visual question answering (VQA), where models answer questions about images that demand reasoning about spatial relationships [845], general knowledge [846], or scene text [847]. To fully explore the capabilities of MLLMs, HallusionBench [848] collects 200 sophisticated visual dependent or supplement questions, on which even the most advanced MLLMs like LLaVA-1.5 [831] and GPT-4V [133] fail to achieve good performance.