Abstract:Real-world tables often exhibit irregular schemas, heterogeneous value formats, and implicit relational structure, which degrade the reliability of downstream table reasoning and question answering. Most existing approaches address these issues in a query-dependent manner, entangling table cleanup with reasoning and thus limiting generalization. We introduce QuIeTT, a query-independent table transformation framework that preprocesses raw tables into a single SQL-ready canonical representation before any test-time queries are observed. QuIeTT performs lossless schema and value normalization, exposes implicit relations, and preserves full provenance via raw table snapshots. By decoupling table transformation from reasoning, QuIeTT enables cleaner, more reliable, and highly efficient querying without modifying downstream models. Experiments on four benchmarks, WikiTQ, HiTab, NQ-Table, and SequentialQA show consistent gains across models and reasoning paradigms, with particularly strong improvements on a challenge set of structurally diverse, unseen questions.
Abstract:Retrieval-augmented question answering over heterogeneous corpora requires connected evidence across text, tables, and graph nodes. While entity-level knowledge graphs support structured access, they are costly to construct and maintain, and inefficient to traverse at query time. In contrast, standard retriever-reader pipelines use flat similarity search over independently chunked text, missing multi-hop evidence chains across modalities. We propose SAGE (Structure Aware Graph Expansion) framework that (i) constructs a chunk-level graph offline using metadata-driven similarities with percentile-based pruning, and (ii) performs online retrieval by running an initial baseline retriever to obtain k seed chunks, expanding first-hop neighbors, and then filtering the neighbors using dense+sparse retrieval, selecting k' additional chunks. We instantiate the initial retriever using hybrid dense+sparse retrieval for implicit cross-modal corpora and SPARK (Structure Aware Planning Agent for Retrieval over Knowledge Graphs) an agentic retriever for explicit schema graphs. On OTT-QA and STaRK, SAGE improves retrieval recall by 5.7 and 8.5 points over baselines.
Abstract:Multimodal Large Language Models (mLLMs) are often used to answer questions in structured data such as tables in Markdown, JSON, and images. While these models can often give correct answers, users also need to know where those answers come from. In this work, we study structured data attribution/citation, which is the ability of the models to point to the specific rows and columns that support an answer. We evaluate several mLLMs across different table formats and prompting strategies. Our results show a clear gap between question answering and evidence attribution. Although question answering accuracy remains moderate, attribution accuracy is much lower, near random for JSON inputs, across all models. We also find that models are more reliable at citing rows than columns, and struggle more with textual formats than images. Finally, we observe notable differences across model families. Overall, our findings show that current mLLMs are unreliable at providing fine-grained, trustworthy attribution for structured data, which limits their usage in applications requiring transparency and traceability.
Abstract:Question answering (QA) over structured tables requires not only accurate answers but also transparency about which cells support them. Existing table QA systems rarely provide fine-grained attribution, so even correct answers often lack verifiable grounding, limiting trust in high-stakes settings. We address this with TraceBack, a modular multi-agent framework for scalable, cell-level attribution in single-table QA. TraceBack prunes tables to relevant rows and columns, decomposes questions into semantically coherent sub-questions, and aligns each answer span with its supporting cells, capturing both explicit and implicit evidence used in intermediate reasoning steps. To enable systematic evaluation, we release CITEBench, a benchmark with phrase-to-cell annotations drawn from ToTTo, FetaQA, and AITQA. We further propose FairScore, a reference-less metric that compares atomic facts derived from predicted cells and answers to estimate attribution precision and recall without human cell labels. Experiments show that TraceBack substantially outperforms strong baselines across datasets and granularities, while FairScore closely tracks human judgments and preserves relative method rankings, supporting interpretable and scalable evaluation of table-based QA.
Abstract:Maps are powerful carriers of structured and contextual knowledge, encompassing geography, demographics, infrastructure, and environmental patterns. Reasoning over such knowledge requires models to integrate spatial relationships, visual cues, real-world context, and domain-specific expertise-capabilities that current large language models (LLMs) and vision-language models (VLMs) still struggle to exhibit consistently. Yet, datasets used to benchmark VLMs on map-based reasoning remain narrow in scope, restricted to specific domains, and heavily reliant on artificially generated content (outputs from LLMs or pipeline-based methods), offering limited depth for evaluating genuine geospatial reasoning. To address this gap, we present MapVerse, a large-scale benchmark built on real-world maps. It comprises 11,837 human-authored question-answer pairs across 1,025 maps, spanning ten diverse map categories and multiple question categories for each. The dataset provides a rich setting for evaluating map reading, interpretation, and multimodal reasoning. We evaluate ten state-of-the-art models against our benchmark to establish baselines and quantify reasoning gaps. Beyond overall performance, we conduct fine-grained categorical analyses to assess model inference across multiple dimensions and investigate the visual factors shaping reasoning outcomes. Our findings reveal that while current VLMs perform competitively on classification-style tasks, both open- and closed-source models fall short on advanced tasks requiring complex spatial reasoning.
Abstract:Large language models often struggle to recognize their knowledge limits in closed-book question answering, leading to confident hallucinations. While decomposed prompting is typically used to improve accuracy, we investigate its impact on reliability. We evaluate three task-equivalent prompting regimes: Direct, Assistive, and Incremental, across different model scales and multi-hop QA benchmarks. We find that although accuracy gains from decomposition diminish in frontier models, disagreements between prompting regimes remain highly indicative of potential errors. Because factual knowledge is stable while hallucinations are stochastic, cross-regime agreement provides a precise signal of internal uncertainty. We leverage this signal to implement a training-free abstention policy that requires no retrieval or fine-tuning. Our results show that disagreement-based abstention outperforms standard uncertainty baselines as an error detector, improving both F1 and AUROC across settings. This demonstrates that decomposition-based prompting can serve as a practical diagnostic probe for model reliability in closed-book QA.
Abstract:Complex question answering across text, tables and images requires integrating diverse information sources. A framework supporting specialized processing with coordination and interpretability is needed. We introduce DeALOG, a decentralized multi-agent framework for multimodal question answering. It uses specialized agents: Table, Context, Visual, Summarizing and Verification, that communicate through a shared natural-language log as persistent memory. This log-based approach enables collaborative error detection and verification without central control, improving robustness. Evaluations on FinQA, TAT-QA, CRT-QA, WikiTableQuestions, FeTaQA, and MultiModalQA show competitive performance. Analysis confirms the importance of the shared log, agent specialization, and verification for accuracy. DeALOG, provides a scalable approach through modular components using natural-language communication.
Abstract:Collaborative learning among LLM-based agents under federated learning faces challenges, including communication costs, heterogeneity in data, and tool-usage, limiting their effectiveness. We introduce Synapse, a framework that trains a shared global knowledge model of tool-usage behavior. Client agents with fixed LLMs learn tool-usage patterns locally, and transmit artifacts for federated aggregation through coordinators. A global tool compendium is updated and redistributed, enabling convergence toward stable tool selection. Synapse uses templated representations, embedding retrieval with LLM reranking, and adaptive masking to maintain utility while limiting information leakage. The framework supports heterogeneous data and quantifies performance improvements. Results show that Synapse improves tool-usage effectiveness and reduces communication overhead compared with weight or prompt-sharing approaches in multi-agent LLM systems.
Abstract:Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used to automate chart generation from data tables, enabling efficient data analysis and reporting but also introducing new misuse risks. In this work, we introduce ChartAttack, a novel framework for evaluating how MLLMs can be misused to generate misleading charts at scale. ChartAttack injects misleaders into chart designs, aiming to induce incorrect interpretations of the underlying data. Furthermore, we create AttackViz, a chart question-answering (QA) dataset where each (chart specification, QA) pair is labeled with effective misleaders and their induced incorrect answers. Experiments in in-domain and cross-domain settings show that ChartAttack significantly degrades the QA performance of MLLM readers, reducing accuracy by an average of 19.6 points and 14.9 points, respectively. A human study further shows an average 20.2 point drop in accuracy for participants exposed to misleading charts generated by ChartAttack. Our findings highlight an urgent need for robustness and security considerations in the design, evaluation, and deployment of MLLM-based chart generation systems. We make our code and data publicly available.
Abstract:Realistic text-to-SQL workflows often require joining multiple tables. As a result, accurately retrieving the relevant set of tables becomes a key bottleneck for end-to-end performance. We study an open-book setting where queries must be answered over large, heterogeneous table collections pooled from many sources, without clean scoping signals such as database identifiers. Here, dense retrieval (DR) achieves high recall but returns many distractors, while join-aware alternatives often rely on extra assumptions and/or incur high inference overhead. We propose CORE-T, a scalable, training-free framework that enriches tables with LLM-generated purpose metadata and pre-computes a lightweight table-compatibility cache. At inference time, DR returns top-K candidates; a single LLM call selects a coherent, joinable subset, and a simple additive adjustment step restores strongly compatible tables. Across Bird, Spider, and MMQA, CORE-T improves table-selection F1 by up to 22.7 points while retrieving up to 42% fewer tables, improving multi-table execution accuracy by up to 5.0 points on Bird and 6.9 points on MMQA, and using 4-5x fewer tokens than LLM-intensive baselines.