TabXEval: Why this is a Bad Table? An eXhaustive Rubric for Table Evaluation

Evaluating tables qualitatively & quantitatively presents a significant challenge, as traditional metrics often fail to capture nuanced structural and content discrepancies. To address this, we introduce a novel, methodical rubric integrating multi-level structural descriptors with fine-grained contextual quantification, thereby establishing a robust foundation for comprehensive table comparison. Building on this foundation, we propose TabXEval, an eXhaustive and eXplainable two-phase evaluation framework. TabXEval initially aligns reference tables structurally via TabAlign & subsequently conducts a systematic semantic and syntactic comparison using TabCompare; this approach clarifies the evaluation process and pinpoints subtle discrepancies overlooked by conventional methods. The efficacy of this framework is assessed using TabXBench, a novel, diverse, multi-domain benchmark we developed, featuring realistic table perturbations and human-annotated assessments. Finally, a systematic analysis of existing evaluation methods through sensitivity-specificity trade-offs demonstrates the qualitative and quantitative effectiveness of TabXEval across diverse table-related tasks and domains, paving the way for future innovations in explainable table evaluation.