VisJudge-Bench: Aesthetics and Quality Assessment of Visualizations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.22373v1
• Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2025 17:31:02 GMT
• Title: VisJudge-Bench: Aesthetics and Quality Assessment of Visualizations
• Authors: Yupeng Xie, Zhiyang Zhang, Yifan Wu, Sirong Lu, Jiayi Zhang, Zhaoyang Yu, Jinlin Wang, Sirui Hong, Bang Liu, Chenglin Wu, Yuyu Luo,
• Abstract summary: multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown promising performance in aesthetic assessment of natural images.<n>No systematic benchmark exists for measuring their capabilities in evaluating visualizations.<n>We propose VisJudge, a model specifically designed for visualization aesthetics and quality assessment.
• Score: 40.10675156646689
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Visualization, a domain-specific yet widely used form of imagery, is an effective way to turn complex datasets into intuitive insights, and its value depends on whether data are faithfully represented, clearly communicated, and aesthetically designed. However, evaluating visualization quality is challenging: unlike natural images, it requires simultaneous judgment across data encoding accuracy, information expressiveness, and visual aesthetics. Although multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown promising performance in aesthetic assessment of natural images, no systematic benchmark exists for measuring their capabilities in evaluating visualizations. To address this, we propose VisJudge-Bench, the first comprehensive benchmark for evaluating MLLMs' performance in assessing visualization aesthetics and quality. It contains 3,090 expert-annotated samples from real-world scenarios, covering single visualizations, multiple visualizations, and dashboards across 32 chart types. Systematic testing on this benchmark reveals that even the most advanced MLLMs (such as GPT-5) still exhibit significant gaps compared to human experts in judgment, with a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 0.551 and a correlation with human ratings of only 0.429. To address this issue, we propose VisJudge, a model specifically designed for visualization aesthetics and quality assessment. Experimental results demonstrate that VisJudge significantly narrows the gap with human judgment, reducing the MAE to 0.442 (a 19.8% reduction) and increasing the consistency with human experts to 0.681 (a 58.7% improvement) compared to GPT-5. The benchmark is available at https://github.com/HKUSTDial/VisJudgeBench.

Related papers

• Using Vision + Language Models to Predict Item Difficulty [0.0]
  We use GPT-4.1-nano to analyze items and generate predictions based on distinct feature sets.<n>The multimodal approach, using both visual and text features, yields the lowest mean absolute error (MAE) (0.224)<n>The best-performing multimodal model was applied to a held-out test set for external evaluation and achieved a mean squared error of 0.10805.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-04T23:26:25Z)
• SAGE: A Realistic Benchmark for Semantic Understanding [9.688555356614044]
  We introduce SAGE (Semantic Alignment & Generalization Evaluation), a rigorous benchmark designed to assess both embedding models and similarity metrics.<n>Our comprehensive evaluation of 9 embedding models and classical metrics reveals significant performance gaps.<n>OpenAI's text-embedding-3-small achieves the highest clustering performance (0.483) but demonstrates extreme brittleness with the lowest robustness score (0.011)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T15:27:15Z)
• SpatialViz-Bench: An MLLM Benchmark for Spatial Visualization [44.427830927596204]
  SpatialViz-Bench is a comprehensive benchmark for spatial visualization with 12 tasks across 4 sub-abilities, comprising 1,180 automatically generated problems.<n>Our evaluation of 33 state-of-the-art MLLMs reveals wide performance variations and uncovers counter-intuitive findings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-10T10:27:20Z)
• ArtifactsBench: Bridging the Visual-Interactive Gap in LLM Code Generation Evaluation [51.297873393639456]
  ArtifactsBench is a framework for automated visual code generation evaluation.<n>Our framework renders each generated artifact and captures its dynamic behavior through temporal screenshots.<n>We construct a new benchmark of 1,825 diverse tasks and evaluate over 30 leading Large Language Models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-07T12:53:00Z)
• STORM: Benchmarking Visual Rating of MLLMs with a Comprehensive Ordinal Regression Dataset [13.574832958298911]
  STORM is a data collection and benchmark for Stimulating Trustworthy Ordinal Regression Ability of MLLMs for universal visual rating.<n>We propose a coarse-to-fine processing pipeline that dynamically considers label candidates and provides interpretable thoughts.<n>This benchmark aims to evaluate the all-in-one and zero-shot performance of MLLMs in scenarios requiring understanding of the essential common ordinal relationships of rating labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-02T14:48:15Z)
• ChartMuseum: Testing Visual Reasoning Capabilities of Large Vision-Language Models [37.54872845368151]
  We conduct a case study using a synthetic dataset solvable only through visual reasoning.<n>We then introduce ChartMuseum, a new Chart Question Answering (QA) benchmark containing 1,162 expert-annotated questions.<n>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%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-19T17:59:27Z)
• Envisioning Beyond the Pixels: Benchmarking Reasoning-Informed Visual Editing [84.16442052968615]
  We introduce RISEBench, the first benchmark for evaluating Reasoning-Informed viSual Editing (RISE)<n>RISEBench focuses on four key reasoning categories: Temporal, Causal, Spatial, and Logical Reasoning.<n>We conduct experiments evaluating nine prominent visual editing models, comprising both open-source and proprietary models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-03T17:59:56Z)
• Human Cognitive Benchmarks Reveal Foundational Visual Gaps in MLLMs [65.93003087656754]
  VisFactor is a benchmark that digitizes 20 vision-centric subtests from a well-established cognitive psychology assessment.<n>We evaluate 20 frontier Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) from GPT, Gemini, Claude, LLaMA, Qwen, and SEED families.<n>The best-performing model achieves a score of only 25.19 out of 100, with consistent failures on tasks such as mental rotation, spatial relation inference, and figure-ground discrimination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-23T04:21:32Z)
• Ambiguous Images With Human Judgments for Robust Visual Event Classification [34.62731821199598]
  We create datasets of ambiguous images and use them to produce SQUID-E ("Squidy"), a collection of noisy images extracted from videos. All images are annotated with ground truth values and a test set is annotated with human uncertainty judgments. We use this dataset to characterize human uncertainty in vision tasks and evaluate existing visual event classification models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-06T17:52:20Z)
• Improving Visual Grounding by Encouraging Consistent Gradient-based Explanations [58.442103936918805]
  We show that Attention Mask Consistency produces superior visual grounding results than previous methods. AMC is effective, easy to implement, and is general as it can be adopted by any vision-language model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T17:55:12Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.