HighlightBench: Benchmarking Markup-Driven Table Reasoning in Scientific Documents
Organizations: Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences · University of California, Merced · University of Queensland
Abstract
Visual markups such as highlights, underlines, and bold text are common in table-centric documents. Although multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have made substantial progress in document understanding, their ability to treat such cues as explicit logical directives remains under-explored. More importantly, existing evaluations cannot distinguish whether a model fails to see the markup or fails to reason with it. This creates a key blind spot in assessing markup-conditioned behavior over tables. To address this gap, we introduce HighlightBench, a diagnostic benchmark for markup-driven table understanding that decomposes evaluation into five task families: Markup Grounding, Constrained Retrieval, Local Relations, Aggregation & Comparison, and Consistency & Missingness. We further provide a reference pipeline that makes intermediate decisions explicit, enabling reproducible baselines and finer-grained attribution of errors along the perception-to-execution chain. Experiments show that even strong models remain unstable when visual cues must be consistently aligned with symbolic reasoning under structured output constraints.
Figures & tables
| Model | Subset | Accuracy (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | All | ||
| Claude Sonnet 4 | Synthetic | 32.7 | 81.9 | 40.0 | 37.5 | 67.1 | 47.6 |
| Real-world | 56.7 | 59.6 | 42.2 | 60.7 | 68.2 | 58.7 | |
| Gemini2.5-Flash | Synthetic | 51.9 | 90.3 | 89.1 | 67.8 | 93.9 | 73.9 |
| Real-world | 81.3 | 75.3 | 62.7 | 72.2 | 78.5 | 75.3 | |
| InternVL3.5-8B | Synthetic | 29.0 | 81.2 | 17.6 | 24.7 | 71.0 | 40.5 |
| Task | Family | Brief example |
|---|---|---|
| Bold Presence | T1 | Is a queried cell boldfaced? |
| Underline Presence | T1 | Is a queried cell underlined? |
| Highlight Presence | T1 | Is a queried cell highlighted? |
| Cell Retrieval | T2 | Read the value at a specified row/column. |
| Extremum Reasoning | T4 | Return the item/value with the column maximum. |
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Symbol | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Table image. | |
| Visual markups in that are relevant to reasoning, including highlights, underlines, bold text, arrows, and color-based emphasis. | |
| Question associated with . | |
| Target structured answer under the task-specific output schema. | |
| Structural evidence indicated by , such as marked cells, headers, rows, columns, or local neighborhoods. | |
| Reasoning condition induced from , such as a filtered subset, a local relation, or a comparison scope. |
| Family | Subtasks |
|---|---|
| Markup Grounding | Marked Value Listing, Marker Counting, Highlight Presence, Marked Column Listing, Underline Presence, Bold Presence |
| Constrained Retrieval | Value Filtering, Color-Anchor Retrieval, Cell Retrieval |
| Local Relations | Neighbor Value Tracing, Marker-Anchor Neighbor, Neighbor Indexing |
| Aggregation & Comparison | Extremum Reasoning, Argmax Reasoning, Grouped Aggregation, Pairwise Comparison, Best Selection, Rank Selection |
| Consistency & Missingness | Column Missingness, Cell Missingness, Consistency Probing |
Multimodal Model Evaluation
Multimodal model evaluation measures how reliably AI systems understand and generate content across text, images, audio, video, and other data.
See all 770 papers