Vision2Code: A Multi-Domain Benchmark for Evaluating Image-to-Code Generation

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are increasingly used in document processing pipelines to convert flowchart images into structured code (e.g., Mermaid). In production, these systems process arbitrary inputs for which no ground-truth code exists, making output quality difficult to assess. We propose a reference-free evaluation framework that monitors flowchart image-to-code generation quality at inference time, using only the input image and the generated output. The framework introduces two automated metrics: $\text{Recall}{\text{OCR}}$, which estimates content coverage by extracting text from the input image via OCR as a proxy reference, and $\text{Precision}{\text{VE}}$, which detects hallucinated elements through Visual Entailment against the original image. Their harmonic mean, $\text{F1}{\text{OCR-VE}}$, provides a unified quality score. Validation on the FlowVQA dataset shows strong agreement with ground-truth metrics (average Pearson's $r = 0.97$, $0.91$, and $0.94$ for Recall, Precision, and F1, respectively), confirming the framework's reliability as a practical, reference-free alternative for continuous quality monitoring in production settings.

Multimodal models increasingly reach for tools when solving visual tasks (crop, zoom, rotate, brighten), a paradigm known as thinking-with-images. The central challenge is one of perception: tools mostly serve to expose visual evidence, reasoning over that evidence stays in language, and most targets are ones a human could in principle determine by inspection. Some visual questions, however, are not bottlenecked by perception: recovering their answers requires executing a multi-step visual algorithm over the pixels. On such questions a model often names the correct algorithm at once yet still answers wrong, because language can describe an algorithm without being able to run one. Code-with-Image crosses that line: given nothing but a Python interpreter, the model must implement a genuine visual algorithm in code to solve the task; the program itself becomes the reasoning. The bottleneck then shifts from executing code to deciding which algorithm to implement. So we let the model teach itself: a training-free reflection loop studies its own failed programs, tests repairs against constructive ground truth, and keeps what survives as portable skills. On our Code-with-Image Bench (CwI-Bench), thirty task families induced by hidden visual computations with disjoint learning and evaluation splits, even GPT-5.6-luna stays below 30% with tool-free chain of thought; given a bare interpreter it reaches 43%, and with skills evolved through its own executable reflection, 67%. The open 27B model climbs the same ladder (9% $\rightarrow$ 33% $\rightarrow$ 56%), and the skills are plain text, transferable across scales and families. When code carries the reasoning, debugging code becomes debugging reasoning.

While Large Language Models (LLMs) have substantially advanced text-to-code synthesis, many real programming tasks specify intent through visual artifacts such as screenshots, charts, vector drawings, videos, and interactive states. These tasks require models to connect visual perception to executable programs, because correctness depends not only on syntax but also on layout, data semantics, interaction behavior, and domain-specific constraints that apply after execution. This survey examines Multimodal Code Intelligence, covering systems that generate, edit, refine, or reason with code under visually grounded inputs and outputs. We first formulate the field by the role that code plays in each task, distinguishing code as a rendered artifact, an editable symbolic structure, a scientific representation, an intermediate reasoning trace, or an executable policy or tool interface. We then organize benchmarks and methods into four domains: Graphical User Interface, Scientific Visualization, Structured Graphics, and Frontier Tasks and Frameworks. This taxonomy connects mature artifact-generation problems to emerging agentic and unified settings and allows us to compare how different tasks treat evidence of correctness. Looking ahead, we argue that future research may benefit from four verification-centered directions. Multi-signal validation can combine complementary evidence of correctness, multi-state verification can test behavior across execution trajectories, cross-task transfer testing can probe reusable visual-code skills, and verifiable agent traces can reveal whether agent actions are grounded in visual evidence. Together, these directions may move this field from single-output imitation toward evidence-grounded executable systems. An ongoing project and resources are available on \href{https://github.com/xjywhu/Awesome-Multimodal-LLM-for-Code}{GitHub}.