Professionals across medicine, engineering, finance, manufacturing, and the sciences often make consequential decisions from charts. Existing chart benchmarks do not sufficiently measure this ability: they are dominated by bar, line, and pie formats, rely on shorter reasoning chains, and are nearing saturation, with frontier models already scoring 80-90%. We introduce Chartography, a benchmark of 100 tasks that pair charts drawn from professional practice, in domain-specific formats that standard chart benchmarks rarely include, with questions written by professionals who read these charts for a living and independently verified by three additional experts. In an evaluation of 30 frontier-model configurations (20 scored trials per task), the best configuration reaches only 45.0% mean pass@1; the remainder span 9.0-39.5%. Failures concentrate in visual perception: models can miss nuanced features, misread values along sparsely labeled axes, mishandle projected 3D geometry, and violate domain conventions encoded in the chart. We release all tasks, images, provenance metadata, and evaluation code.
In real-world applications, current multimodal large models are often overestimated in their ability to understand scientific charts. To assess their true capabilities and identify key performance bottlenecks, we conducted an in-depth study on scientific chart understanding. Charts in scientific literature often featur...
Ling-Dong Shen, Qigqi, Kun Ding et al.· IEEE Transactions on Image P...· 0 citations
Professional work often starts with a brief request that leaves the professional to work out what is needed, which documents matter, and whether the request's premise holds. We introduce DAYJOB, a benchmark of 130 tasks built by professionals in healthcare (50) and finance (80). The tasks are estimated to take a profes...
Stephanie Finley, Liudas Panavas, T. Mikkelson et al.· 0 citations
This work applies RIFT, a global rubric failure taxonomy, to two clinical benchmarks (HealthBench Professional and LiveMedBench), and finds failure modes are meaningful: on HealthBench Professional an LLM judge flags 29.6% of criteria as non-atomic and 65.4% as misaligned/rigid.
SciLitBench identifies a practical boundary between high-recall screening and evidence-complete extraction and provides a reproducible resource for evaluating LLM-assisted evidence synthesis.
BACKGROUND
Statistical Process Control (SPC) charts are widely used in healthcare to monitor and improve quality. Selecting the appropriate chart can be challenging because healthcare data often comprise subgroup summary measures derived from varying numbers of observations. The traditional Individuals (I-) chart is po...
J. Anhøj, Wayne A. Taylor, Mohammed A. Mohammed· International Journal for Qu...· 0 citations
RadMatch is the most clinically aligned metric, matching inter-radiologist agreement on ReXVal and more than doubling the best prior metric on the harder RadEvalExpert, and is designed to extend to other modalities and anatomies.
Charles Corbière, Léo Machado, Aubin Charley et al.· 1 citation
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.