DEEPCHART: How Far are LLMs from Faithful Data-Science Chart Generation?
Organizations: University of Science and Technology of China · Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Abstract
Faithful chart generation in real-world data-science workflows requires grounding visualizations in scattered evidence, computing chart-ready quantities, and rendering them accurately. Modern LLMs can produce visually plausible, instruction-compliant charts, yet data-level hallucinations remain difficult to detect in long, noisy, and multimodal contexts. To measure this gap, we introduce DEEPCHART, an expert-annotated benchmark of 1,482 task-conditioned chart-generation instances drawn from real-world scientific papers, financial filings, and ecosystem reports. DEEPCHART formulates chart generation as an Extract--Reason--Visualize pipeline and evaluates source-data extraction, derived-data reasoning, and chart rendering stage by stage. Experiments with state-of-the-art models show that visually plausible charts often conceal data-level hallucinations, with extraction and reasoning errors common in realistic long and multimodal settings. These findings suggest that larger context windows alone are insufficient; faithful chart generation also requires reliable evidence extraction and quantitative reasoning before rendering. Our benchmark and associated resources are available at https://github.com/tangdouer1005/DeepChart.
Figures & tables
| Method | Input Setting | Task Requirement | Evaluation Granularity | ||||
| Context | Modality | Real-doc | Retrieval | Reasoning | Visual | Stage-by-stage | |
| Text2Chart31 Pesaran Zadeh et al. (2024) | <16K | Txt+Tab | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ |
| MatPlotBench Yang et al. (2024) | <32K | Tab | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
| Text2Vis Rahman et al. (2025) | <2K | Tab | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
| C 2 /ChartUIE-8K Koh et al. (2025) | <32K | Tab | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
| Doc2Chart Jain et al. (2025) | <32K ∗ | Txt+Tab | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
| Ecosystem | ||||
| Model | ER | VAS | ||
| Shared Models | ||||
| GPT-5.2 | 0.7031 | 0.0207 | 0.0386 | 0.1589 |
| Claude 4.5 Opus | 0.9609 | 0.1792 | 0.2832 | 0.6963 |
| Gemini 3 Pro | 0.9844 | 0.1965 | 0.4529 | 0.7427 |
| Gemini 3 Flash | 0.6133 | 0.2167 | 0.4107 | 0.4055 |
| Finance-Ultra-Long | ||||
| Model | ER | VAS | ||
| Proprietary Models | ||||
| GPT-5.2 | 0.9200 | 0.1830 | 0.1930 | 0.3785 |
| Claude 4.5 Opus | 1.0000 | 0.1726 | 0.1179 | 0.3800 |
| Gemini 3 Pro | 0.4600 | 0.4421 | 0.3178 | 0.2969 |
| Gemini 3 Flash | 0.8000 | 0.4197 | 0.4182 | 0.4592 |
| Model | ER | VAS | ||
| Py | HTML | Py | HTML | |
| Proprietary Models | ||||
| GPT-5.2 | 0.765 | 0.983 | 0.521 | 0.573 |
| Gemini-3-flash | 0.704 | 0.931 | 0.474 | 0.559 |
| Open-weight Models | ||||
| Qwen3-235B | 0.815 | 0.854 | 0.453 | 0.379 |
Appendix figures & tables10 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Domain / Query Type | # | Share |
| Academic | ||
| - Condition/group comparison | 47 | 26.40% |
| - Dose/response curve | 27 | 15.17% |
| - Association/correlation | 20 | 11.24% |
| - Spatial/geographic comparison | 18 | 10.11% |
| - Scenario/sensitivity analysis | 16 | 8.99% |
| Statistic | Number |
| Overall | |
| - Domains | 3 |
| - Queries | 724 |
| - Instances | 1,482 |
| - Chart types | 30 families / 56 specific |
| - Query types | 45 families / 244 specific |
| Domain / Chart family | #Q | Share |
| Academic | ||
| - Grouped Bar Chart | 43 | 24.2% |
| - Regression Scatter Plot | 18 | 10.1% |
| - Dose-Response Plot | 18 | 10.1% |
| - Heatmap | 12 | 6.7% |
| - Line Chart | 12 | 6.7% |
| Judge Pair | Acc. | F1 | MAE | |||
| G5.2 / G4o | 0.776 | 0.702 | 0.415 | 0.650 | 0.392 | 0.162 |
| G5.2 / Q3.5 | 0.898 | 0.878 | 0.755 | 0.875 | 0.778 | 0.078 |
| G5.2 / QVL | 0.773 | 0.711 | 0.427 | 0.722 | 0.513 | 0.129 |
| G4o / Q3.5 | 0.794 | 0.717 | 0.441 | 0.668 | 0.435 | 0.147 |
| G4o / QVL | 0.824 | 0.736 | 0.472 | 0.724 | 0.509 | 0.111 |
| Q3.5 / QVL | 0.778 | 0.708 | 0.418 | 0.685 | 0.453 | 0.128 |
Data Visualization
Data visualization studies how visual representations help people explore, interpret, communicate, and reason about data.
See all 118 papersGenerating Statistical Charts with Validation-Driven LLM Workflows
RealChart2Code: Advancing Chart-to-Code Generation with Real Data and Multi-Task Evaluation
RealChart2Code, a new large-scale benchmark with over 2,800 instances grounded in authentic datasets and featuring tasks with clear analytical intent. Crucially, it is the first benchmark to systematically evaluate chart generation from large-scale raw data and assess iterative code refinement in a multi-turn conversational setting. Our comprehensive evaluation of 14 leading VLMs on RealChart2Code reveals significant performance degradation compared to simpler benchmarks, highlighting their struggles with complex plot structures and authentic data. Our analysis uncovers a substantial performance gap between proprietary and open-weight models and confirms that even state-of-the-art VLMs often fail to accurately replicate intricate, multi-panel charts. These findings provide valuable insights into the current limitations of VLMs and guide future research directions. We release the benchmark and code at https://github.com/Speakn0w/RealChart2Code.