Table understanding is key to addressing challenging downstream tasks such as table-based question answering and fact verification. Recent works have focused on leveraging Chain-of-Thought and question decomposition to solve complex questions requiring multiple operations on tables. However, these methods often suffer from a lack of explicit long-term planning and weak inter-step connections, leading to miss constraints within questions. In this paper, we propose leveraging the long-term planning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) to enhance table understanding. Our approach enables the execution of a long-term plan, where the steps are tightly interconnected and serve the ultimate goal, an aspect that methods based on Chain-of-Thought and question decomposition lack. In addition, our method effectively minimizes the inclusion of unnecessary details in the process of solving the next short-term goals, a limitation of methods based on Chain-of-Thought. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method outperforms strong baselines and achieves state-of-the-art performance on WikiTableQuestions and TabFact datasets.
Multimodal tables those that integrate semi structured data with visual elements such as charts and maps are ubiquitous across real world domains, yet they pose a formidable challenge to current vision language models (VLMs). While Large Language models (LLMs) and VLMs have demonstrated strong capabilities in text and image understanding, their performance on complex, real world multimodal table reasoning remains unexplored. To bridge this gap, we introduce MMTBENCH (Multimodal Table Benchmark), a benchmark consisting of 500 real world multimodal tables drawn from diverse real world sources, with a total of 4021 question answer pairs. MMTBENCH questions cover four question types (Explicit, Implicit, Answer Mention, and Visual Based), five reasoning types (Mathematical, Extrema Identification, Fact Verification, Vision Based, and Others), and eight table types (Single/Multiple Entity, Maps and Charts with Entities, Single/Multiple Charts, Maps, and Visualizations). Extensive evaluation of state of the art models on all types reveals substantial performance gaps, particularly on questions requiring visual-based reasoning and multi-step inference. These findings show the urgent need for improved architectures that more tightly integrate vision and language processing. By providing a challenging, high-quality resource that mirrors the complexity of real-world tasks, MMTBENCH underscores its value as a resource for future research on multimodal tables.
Scientific fact-checking has mostly focused on text and tables, overlooking scientific charts, which are key for presenting quantitative evidence and statistical reasoning. We introduce ClimateViz, the first large-scale benchmark for scientific fact-checking using expert-curated scientific charts. ClimateViz contains 49,862 claims linked to 2,896 visualizations, each labeled as support, refute, or not enough information. To improve interpretability, each example includes structured knowledge graph explanations covering trends, comparisons, and causal relations. We evaluate state-of-the-art multimodal language models, including both proprietary and open-source systems, in zero-shot and few-shot settings. Results show that current models struggle with chart-based reasoning: even the best systems, such as Gemini 2.5 and InternVL 2.5, reach only 76.2 to 77.8 percent accuracy in label-only settings, far below human performance (89.3 and 92.7 percent). Explanation-augmented outputs improve performance in some models. We released our dataset and code alongside the paper.
Tabular data contains rich structural semantics and plays a crucial role in organizing and manipulating information. To better capture these structural semantics, this paper introduces the HybrId-modal Preference oPtimizatiOn (HIPPO) model, which represents tables using both text and image, and optimizes MLLMs to effectively learn more comprehensive table information from these multiple modalities. Specifically, HIPPO samples model responses from hybrid-modal table representations and designs a modality-consistent sampling strategy to enhance response diversity and mitigate modality bias during DPO training. Experimental results on table question answering and table fact verification tasks demonstrate the effectiveness of HIPPO, achieving a 4% improvement over various table reasoning models. Further analysis reveals that HIPPO not only enhances reasoning abilities based on unimodal table representations but also facilitates the extraction of crucial and distinct semantics from different modal representations. All data and codes are available at https://github.com/NEUIR/HIPPO.




Current Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit limited ability to understand table structures and to apply precise numerical reasoning, which is crucial for tasks such as table question answering (TQA) and table-based fact verification (TFV). To address these challenges, we introduce our Tool-Augmented Reasoning framework for Tables (TART), which integrates LLMs with specialized tools. TART contains three key components: a table formatter to ensure accurate data representation, a tool maker to develop specific computational tools, and an explanation generator to maintain explainability. We also present the TOOLTAB dataset, a new benchmark designed specifically for training LLMs in table-tool integration. Our experiments indicate that TART achieves substantial improvements over existing methods (e.g., Chain-of-Thought) by improving both the precision of data processing and the clarity of the reasoning process. Notably, TART paired with CodeLlama achieves 90.0% of the accuracy of the closed-sourced LLM GPT-3.5-turbo, highlighting its robustness in diverse real-world scenarios. All the code and data are available at https://github.com/XinyuanLu00/TART.
Table-based Fact Verification (TFV) aims to extract the entailment relation between statements and structured tables. Existing TFV methods based on small-scaled models suffer from insufficient labeled data and weak zero-shot ability. Recently, the appearance of Large Language Models (LLMs) has gained lots of attraction in research fields. They have shown powerful zero-shot and in-context learning abilities on several NLP tasks, but their potential on TFV is still unknown. In this work, we implement a preliminary study about whether LLMs are table-based fact-checkers. In detail, we design diverse prompts to explore how the in-context learning can help LLMs in TFV, i.e., zero-shot and few-shot TFV capability. Besides, we carefully design and construct TFV instructions to study the performance gain brought by the instruction tuning of LLMs. Experimental results demonstrate that LLMs can achieve acceptable results on zero-shot and few-shot TFV with prompt engineering, while instruction-tuning can stimulate the TFV capability significantly. We also make some valuable findings about the format of zero-shot prompts and the number of in-context examples. Finally, we analyze some possible directions to promote the accuracy of TFV via LLMs, which is beneficial to further research of table reasoning.
Tabular reasoning involves interpreting unstructured queries against structured tables, requiring a synthesis of textual understanding and symbolic reasoning. Existing methods rely on either of the approaches and are constrained by their respective limitations. Textual reasoning excels in semantic interpretation unlike symbolic reasoning (SQL logic), but falls short in mathematical reasoning where SQL excels. In this paper, we introduce a novel algorithm H-STAR, comprising table extraction and adaptive reasoning, integrating both symbolic and semantic (text-based) approaches. To enhance evidence extraction, H-STAR employs a multi-view approach, incorporating step-by-step row and column retrieval. It also adapts reasoning strategies based on question types, utilizing symbolic reasoning for quantitative and logical tasks, and semantic reasoning for direct lookup and complex lexical queries. Our extensive experiments demonstrate that H-STAR significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods across three tabular question-answering (QA) and fact-verification datasets, underscoring its effectiveness and efficiency.
Table-based reasoning with large language models (LLMs) is a promising direction to tackle many table understanding tasks, such as table-based question answering and fact verification. Compared with generic reasoning, table-based reasoning requires the extraction of underlying semantics from both free-form questions and semi-structured tabular data. Chain-of-Thought and its similar approaches incorporate the reasoning chain in the form of textual context, but it is still an open question how to effectively leverage tabular data in the reasoning chain. We propose the Chain-of-Table framework, where tabular data is explicitly used in the reasoning chain as a proxy for intermediate thoughts. Specifically, we guide LLMs using in-context learning to iteratively generate operations and update the table to represent a tabular reasoning chain. LLMs can therefore dynamically plan the next operation based on the results of the previous ones. This continuous evolution of the table forms a chain, showing the reasoning process for a given tabular problem. The chain carries structured information of the intermediate results, enabling more accurate and reliable predictions. Chain-of-Table achieves new state-of-the-art performance on WikiTQ, FeTaQA, and TabFact benchmarks across multiple LLM choices.
Tables, typically two-dimensional and structured to store large amounts of data, are essential in daily activities like database queries, spreadsheet calculations, and generating reports from web tables. Automating these table-centric tasks with Large Language Models (LLMs) offers significant public benefits, garnering interest from academia and industry. This survey provides an extensive overview of table tasks, encompassing not only the traditional areas like table question answering (Table QA) and fact verification, but also newly emphasized aspects such as table manipulation and advanced table data analysis. Additionally, it goes beyond the early strategies of pre-training and fine-tuning small language models, to include recent paradigms in LLM usage. The focus here is particularly on instruction-tuning, prompting, and agent-based approaches within the realm of LLMs. Finally, we highlight several challenges, ranging from private deployment and efficient inference to the development of extensive benchmarks for table manipulation and advanced data analysis.
Fact verification has attracted a lot of research attention recently, e.g., in journalism, marketing, and policymaking, as misinformation and disinformation online can sway one's opinion and affect one's actions. While fact-checking is a hard task in general, in many cases, false statements can be easily debunked based on analytics over tables with reliable information. Hence, table-based fact verification has recently emerged as an important and growing research area. Yet, progress has been limited due to the lack of datasets that can be used to pre-train language models (LMs) to be aware of common table operations, such as aggregating a column or comparing tuples. To bridge this gap, in this paper we introduce PASTA, a novel state-of-the-art framework for table-based fact verification via pre-training with synthesized sentence-table cloze questions. In particular, we design six types of common sentence-table cloze tasks, including Filter, Aggregation, Superlative, Comparative, Ordinal, and Unique, based on which we synthesize a large corpus consisting of 1.2 million sentence-table pairs from WikiTables. PASTA uses a recent pre-trained LM, DeBERTaV3, and further pretrains it on our corpus. Our experimental results show that PASTA achieves new state-of-the-art performance on two table-based fact verification benchmarks: TabFact and SEM-TAB-FACTS. In particular, on the complex set of TabFact, which contains multiple operations, PASTA largely outperforms the previous state of the art by 4.7 points (85.6% vs. 80.9%), and the gap between PASTA and human performance on the small TabFact test set is narrowed to just 1.5 points (90.6% vs. 92.1%).