Abstract:Data videos are a powerful medium for visual data based storytelling, combining animated, chart-centric visualizations with synchronized narration. Widely used in journalism, education, and public communication, they help audiences understand complex data through clear and engaging visual explanations. Despite their growing impact, generating data-driven video stories remains challenging, as it requires careful coordination of visual encoding, temporal progression, and narration and substantial expertise in visualization design, animation, and video-editing tools. Recent advances in large language models offer new opportunities to automate this process; however, there is currently no benchmark for rigorously evaluating models on animated visualization-based video storytelling. To address this gap, we introduce DataReel, a benchmark for automated data-driven video story generation comprising 328 real-world stories. Each story pairs structured data, a chart visualization, and a narration transcript, enabling systematic evaluation of models' abilities to generate animated data video stories. We further propose a multi-agent framework that decomposes the task into planning, generation, and verification stages, mirroring key aspects of the human storytelling process. Experiments show that this multi-agent approach outperforms direct prompting baselines under both automatic and human evaluations, while revealing persistent challenges in coordinating animation, narration, and visual emphasis. We release DataReel at https://github.com/vis-nlp/DataReel.
Abstract:Dashboards are powerful visualization tools for data-driven decision-making, integrating multiple interactive views that allow users to explore, filter, and navigate data. Unlike static charts, dashboards support rich interactivity, which is essential for uncovering insights in real-world analytical workflows. However, existing question-answering benchmarks for data visualizations largely overlook this interactivity, focusing instead on static charts. This limitation severely constrains their ability to evaluate the capabilities of modern multimodal agents designed for GUI-based reasoning. To address this gap, we introduce DashboardQA, the first benchmark explicitly designed to assess how vision-language GUI agents comprehend and interact with real-world dashboards. The benchmark includes 112 interactive dashboards from Tableau Public and 405 question-answer pairs with interactive dashboards spanning five categories: multiple-choice, factoid, hypothetical, multi-dashboard, and conversational. By assessing a variety of leading closed- and open-source GUI agents, our analysis reveals their key limitations, particularly in grounding dashboard elements, planning interaction trajectories, and performing reasoning. Our findings indicate that interactive dashboard reasoning is a challenging task overall for all the VLMs evaluated. Even the top-performing agents struggle; for instance, the best agent based on Gemini-Pro-2.5 achieves only 38.69% accuracy, while the OpenAI CUA agent reaches just 22.69%, demonstrating the benchmark's significant difficulty. We release DashboardQA at https://github.com/vis-nlp/DashboardQA
Abstract:Charts are ubiquitous as they help people understand and reason with data. Recently, various downstream tasks, such as chart question answering, chart2text, and fact-checking, have emerged. Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) show promise in tackling these tasks, but their evaluation is costly and time-consuming, limiting real-world deployment. While using LVLMs as judges to assess the chart comprehension capabilities of other LVLMs could streamline evaluation processes, challenges like proprietary datasets, restricted access to powerful models, and evaluation costs hinder their adoption in industrial settings. To this end, we present a comprehensive evaluation of 13 open-source LVLMs as judges for diverse chart comprehension and reasoning tasks. We design both pairwise and pointwise evaluation tasks covering criteria like factual correctness, informativeness, and relevancy. Additionally, we analyze LVLM judges based on format adherence, positional consistency, length bias, and instruction-following. We focus on cost-effective LVLMs (<10B parameters) suitable for both research and commercial use, following a standardized evaluation protocol and rubric to measure the LVLM judge's accuracy. Experimental results reveal notable variability: while some open LVLM judges achieve GPT-4-level evaluation performance (about 80% agreement with GPT-4 judgments), others struggle (below ~10% agreement). Our findings highlight that state-of-the-art open-source LVLMs can serve as cost-effective automatic evaluators for chart-related tasks, though biases such as positional preference and length bias persist.