ChartDiff: A Large-Scale Benchmark for Comprehending Pairs of Charts
Organizations: Department of Computer Science, Aalto University
Abstract
Charts are central to analytical reasoning, yet existing benchmarks for chart understanding focus almost exclusively on single-chart interpretation rather than comparative reasoning across multiple charts. To address this gap, we introduce ChartDiff, the first large-scale benchmark for cross-chart comparative summarization. ChartDiff consists of 8,541 chart pairs spanning diverse data sources, chart types, and visual styles, each annotated with LLM-generated and human-verified summaries describing differences in trends, fluctuations, and anomalies. Using ChartDiff, we evaluate general-purpose, chart-specialized, and pipeline-based models. Our results show that frontier general-purpose models achieve the highest GPT-based quality, while specialized and pipeline-based methods obtain higher ROUGE scores but lower human-aligned evaluation, revealing a clear mismatch between lexical overlap and actual summary quality. We further find that multi-series charts remain challenging across model families, whereas strong end-to-end models are relatively robust to differences in plotting libraries. Overall, our findings demonstrate that comparative chart reasoning remains a significant challenge for current vision-language models and position ChartDiff as a new benchmark for advancing research on multi-chart understanding.
Figures & tables
| Chart Type | Pairs | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Line | 2257 | 26.4% |
| Bar | 2153 | 25.2% |
| Horizontal Bar | 679 | 8.0% |
| Line (Multi-series) | 1044 | 12.2% |
| Bar (Multi-series) | 1072 | 12.6% |
| Pie | 1336 | 15.6% |
| Models | ROUGE-1 | ROUGE-2 | ROUGE-L | GPT Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| General-Purpose Closed-Source Models | ||||
| GPT-5.4 Singh et al. (2025) | 46.02 | 12.28 | 23.45 | 4.95 |
| Gemini 3.1 Pro Google Deepmind (2026b) | 47.21 | 13.48 | 24.2 | 4.86 |
| GPT-5.4-mini Singh et al. (2025) | 43.0 | 10.62 | 21.68 | 4.82 |
| Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Google Deepmind (2026a) | 46.37 | 12.83 | 22.82 | 4.63 |
| Claude Sonnet 4.6 Anthropic (2026) | 47.54 | 13.31 | 23.42 | 4.58 |
| Models | GPT Score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | Chart Type | ||||||
| Line | Bar | Bar(H.) | Line(M.) | Bar(M.) | Pie | ||
| General-Purpose Closed-Source Models | |||||||
| GPT-5.4 Singh et al. (2025) | 4.95 | 4.97 | 4.97 | 4.89 | 4.9 | 4.88 | 4.99 |
| Gemini 3.1 Pro Google Deepmind (2026b) | 4.86 | 4.82 | 4.9 | 4.94 | 4.65 | 4.85 | 4.98 |
| GPT-5.4-mini Singh et al. (2025) | 4.82 | 4.86 | 4.82 | 4.75 | 4.74 | 4.78 | 4.85 |
| Models | Overall | Plotting Libraries | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matplotlib | Plotly | Plotnine | ||
| GPT-5.4 Singh et al. (2025) | 4.95 | 4.94 | 4.97 | 4.93 |
| Qwen3.5-397B-A17B Qwen Team (2026) | 4.54 | 4.51 | 4.63 | 4.44 |
| ChartGemma Masry et al. (2025b) | 2.0 | 2.06 | 1.99 | 1.95 |
| Deplot Liu et al. (2023a) + GPT-5.4 | 3.58 | 4.08 | 3.12 | 3.89 |
Appendix figures & tables16 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Chart Understanding
Chart understanding enables AI systems to read visualizations, recover their data, answer questions, and reason about what charts show.
See all 59 papers