Do Large Language Models Understand Data Visualization Principles?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20084v1
• Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2026 17:51:06 GMT
• Title: Do Large Language Models Understand Data Visualization Principles?
• Authors: Martin Sinnona, Valentin Bonas, Viviana Siless, Emmanuel Iarussi,
• Abstract summary: It remains unclear whether large language models (LLMs) and vision-language counterparts (VLMs) can reason about and enforce visualization principles directly.<n>We evaluate both checking and fixing tasks, assessing how well models detect principle violations and correct flawed chart specifications.<n>Our work highlights both the promise of large (vision-)language models as flexible validators and editors of visualization designs and the persistent gap with symbolic solvers on more nuanced aspects of visual perception.
• Score: 2.3332469289621787
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Data visualization principles, derived from decades of research in design and perception, ensure proper visual communication. While prior work has shown that large language models (LLMs) can generate charts or flag misleading figures, it remains unclear whether they and their vision-language counterparts (VLMs) can reason about and enforce visualization principles directly. Constraint based systems encode these principles as logical rules for precise automated checks, but translating them into formal specifications demands expert knowledge. This motivates leveraging LLMs and VLMs as principle checkers that can reason about visual design directly, bypassing the need for symbolic rule specification. In this paper, we present the first systematic evaluation of both LLMs and VLMs on their ability to reason about visualization principles, using hard verification ground truth derived from Answer Set Programming (ASP). We compiled a set of visualization principles expressed as natural-language statements and generated a controlled dataset of approximately 2,000 Vega-Lite specifications annotated with explicit principle violations, complemented by over 300 real-world Vega-Lite charts. We evaluated both checking and fixing tasks, assessing how well models detect principle violations and correct flawed chart specifications. Our work highlights both the promise of large (vision-)language models as flexible validators and editors of visualization designs and the persistent gap with symbolic solvers on more nuanced aspects of visual perception. They also reveal an interesting asymmetry: frontier models tend to be more effective at correcting violations than at detecting them reliably.

Related papers

• Through the Lens of Contrast: Self-Improving Visual Reasoning in VLMs [60.93949629734977]
  We propose Visual Contrastive Self-Taught Reasoner (VC-STaR) to mitigate hallucinations in model-generated rationales.<n>We collect a diverse suite of VQA datasets, curate contrastive pairs according to multi-modal similarity, and generate rationales using VC-STaR.<n>Extensive experiments show that VC-STaR not only outperforms existing self-improving approaches but also surpasses models finetuned on the SoTA visual reasoning datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T03:18:31Z)
• De-rendering, Reasoning, and Repairing Charts with Vision-Language Models [2.3332469289621787]
  Rule-based visualization linters can flag violations, but they miss context and do not suggest meaningful design changes.<n>We introduce a framework that combines chart de-rendering, automated analysis, and iterative improvement to deliver actionable, interpretable feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T19:16:27Z)
• Do Large Language Models Understand Data Visualization Rules? [2.3332469289621787]
  Large language models (LLMs) can generate charts or flag misleading figures, but it remains unclear whether they can reason about and enforce visualization rules directly.<n>We present the first systematic evaluation of LLMs against visualization rules using hard-verification ground truth derived from Answer Set Programming (ASP)<n>Results show that frontier models achieve high adherence (Gemma 3 4B / 27B: 100%, GPT-oss 20B: 98%) and reliably detect common violations (F1 up to 0.82),yet performance drops for subtler perceptual rules (F1 0.15 for some categories) and for outputs generated from technical
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T18:47:51Z)
• Vision Language Models Are Not (Yet) Spelling Correctors [0.742779257315787]
  Spelling correction from visual input poses unique challenges for vision language models (VLMs)<n>We present ReViCo, the first benchmark that systematically evaluates VLMs on real-world visual spelling correction across Chinese and English.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-22T07:10:42Z)
• Can MLLMs Guide Me Home? A Benchmark Study on Fine-Grained Visual Reasoning from Transit Maps [56.76175383189738]
  We introduce ReasonMap, a benchmark designed to assess the fine-grained visual understanding and spatial reasoning abilities of MLLMs.<n>ReasonMap encompasses high-resolution transit maps from 30 cities across 13 countries and includes 1,008 question-answer pairs spanning two question types and three templates.<n> Comprehensive evaluations of 15 popular MLLMs, including both base and reasoning variants, reveal a counterintuitive pattern.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-24T12:33:52Z)
• Towards Understanding Graphical Perception in Large Multimodal Models [80.44471730672801]
  We leverage the theory of graphical perception to develop an evaluation framework for analyzing gaps in LMMs' perception abilities in charts.<n>We apply our framework to evaluate and diagnose the perception capabilities of state-of-the-art LMMs at three levels (chart, visual element, and pixel)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-13T20:13:39Z)
• Fine-Grained Verifiers: Preference Modeling as Next-token Prediction in Vision-Language Alignment [57.0121616203175]
  We propose FiSAO, a novel self-alignment method that utilizes the model's own visual encoder as a fine-grained verifier to improve vision-language alignment.<n>By leveraging token-level feedback from the vision encoder, FiSAO significantly improves vision-language alignment, even surpassing traditional preference tuning methods that require additional data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T03:34:32Z)
• Enhancing Visual-Language Modality Alignment in Large Vision Language Models via Self-Improvement [102.22911097049953]
  Large vision-language models (LVLMs) have achieved impressive results in visual question-answering and reasoning tasks.<n>Existing methods often depend on external models or data, leading to uncontrollable and unstable alignment results.<n>We propose SIMA, a self-improvement framework that enhances visual and language modality alignment without external dependencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-24T23:09:27Z)
• Behind the Magic, MERLIM: Multi-modal Evaluation Benchmark for Large Image-Language Models [50.653838482083614]
  This paper introduces a scalable test-bed to assess the capabilities of IT-LVLMs on fundamental computer vision tasks.<n> MERLIM contains over 300K image-question pairs and has a strong focus on detecting cross-modal "hallucination" events in IT-LVLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-03T16:39:36Z)
• What Makes for Good Visual Tokenizers for Large Language Models? [26.488269091290597]
  We investigate proper pre-training methods to build good visual tokenizers, making Large Language Models (LLMs) powerful Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) We discuss different visual tokenizers pre-trained with dominant methods (i.e., DeiT, CLIP, MAE, DINO) We obtain a new MLLM equipped with a tailored Good Visual Tokenizer (GVT), which exhibits strong visual comprehension capability at multiple scales.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-20T16:11:26Z)

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.