Papers
arxiv:2505.13444

ChartMuseum: Testing Visual Reasoning Capabilities of Large Vision-Language Models

Published on May 19
ยท Submitted by lytang on May 20
Authors:
,
,
,
,
,

Abstract

Chart understanding presents a unique challenge for large vision-language models (LVLMs), as it requires the integration of sophisticated textual and visual reasoning capabilities. However, current LVLMs exhibit a notable imbalance between these skills, falling short on visual reasoning that is difficult to perform in text. We conduct a case study using a synthetic dataset solvable only through visual reasoning and show that model performance degrades significantly with increasing visual complexity, while human performance remains robust. We then introduce ChartMuseum, a new Chart Question Answering (QA) benchmark containing 1,162 expert-annotated questions spanning multiple reasoning types, curated from real-world charts across 184 sources, specifically built to evaluate complex visual and textual reasoning. Unlike prior chart understanding benchmarks -- where frontier models perform similarly and near saturation -- our benchmark exposes a substantial gap between model and human performance, while effectively differentiating model capabilities: although humans achieve 93% accuracy, the best-performing model Gemini-2.5-Pro attains only 63.0%, and the leading open-source LVLM Qwen2.5-VL-72B-Instruct achieves only 38.5%. Moreover, on questions requiring primarily visual reasoning, all models experience a 35%-55% performance drop from text-reasoning-heavy question performance. Lastly, our qualitative error analysis reveals specific categories of visual reasoning that are challenging for current LVLMs.

Community

Paper author Paper submitter

Introducing ChartMuseum ๐Ÿ–ผ๏ธ, testing complex visual reasoning with diverse real-world charts!

โœ๐Ÿป Entirely human-written questions by 13 CS researchers
๐Ÿ‘€ Emphasis on visual reasoning โ€“ hard to be verbalized via text CoTs
๐Ÿ“‰ Humans reach 93% but 63% from Gemini-2.5-Pro & 38% from Qwen2.5-72B

Leaderboard available at: https://chartmuseum-leaderboard.github.io

ยท
Paper author

Existing chart QA benchmarks have limitations:
โŒ Limited real-world chart sources
โŒ Questions are created with LLM in the loop
โŒ Saturated/similar model performance
โŒ Most questions can be answered by a text-LLM with extracted text from charts

ChartMuseum:
โœ… 184 chart sources
โœ… Entirely human-written questions
โœ… Clear distinctions in model performance
โœ… Most questions relies on visual reasoning, which is hard to be verbalized through text

Sign up or log in to comment

Models citing this paper 0

No model linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2505.13444 in a model README.md to link it from this page.

Datasets citing this paper 1

Spaces citing this paper 0

No Space linking this paper

Cite arxiv.org/abs/2505.13444 in a Space README.md to link it from this page.

Collections including this paper 1