Structure-Token Evidence-Anchored Reasoning for Scientific Chart Understanding
Organizations: University of Brasilia
Abstract
Scientific charts encode quantities in axes, legends, and geometric marks, yet large vision-language models still treat them as natural photographs. Visual in-context examples do not expose the coordinate frame; unconstrained chain-of-thought can name a plausible number that was never read from a bar. We present STEER (Structure-Token Evidence-anchored Reasoning), which freezes a Llama-3.2-Vision encoder and inserts three modules: a chart structure graph encoder (CSGE) that binds ticks, legend items, and marks; evidence-anchored step reasoning (EASR) that forces every arithmetic step to cite a graph node; and weak-parser strong-reasoner alignment (WPSR) that uses a specialized table extractor only as a teacher of node attributes. On ChartQA, STEER reaches 82.70 average relaxed accuracy versus 80.16 for ChartGemma and 76.40 for a LLaVA-CoT backbone trained on the same mix. Gains widen on CharXiv reasoning (33.60 vs. 29.20 InternVL Chat V1.5) and ChartQAPro CoT (40.70 vs. 37.17 Qwen2-VL-7B), where OCR shortcuts disappear. Ablations show that dropping node serialization or numeric candidate constraints undoes most of the reasoning lift.
Figures & tables
| Dataset | Scale | Split used | Metric |
|---|---|---|---|
| ChartQA ( Masry et al., 2022 ) | 21.9k charts | official test | RA avg |
| CharXiv ( Wang et al., 2024b ) | 2,323 charts | val 1k | reason. / desc. |
| ChartBench ( Xu et al., 2023 ) | 66.6k charts | official test | Acc+ |
| ChartQAPro ( Masry et al., 2025a ) | 1,341 charts | official | RA (CoT) |
| Method | Size | aug. | human | avg. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pix2Struct ( Lee et al., 2023 ) | 282M | 81.6 | 30.5 | 56.0 |
| MatCha ( Liu et al., 2023 ) | 282M | 90.2 | 38.2 | 64.2 |
| UniChart ( Masry et al., 2023 ) | 201M | 88.56 | 43.92 | 66.24 |
| ChartInstruct-T5 ( Masry et al., 2024 ) | 3B | 85.04 | 43.36 | 64.20 |
| ChartInstruct-LLaMA2 ( Masry et al., 2024 ) | 7B | 87.76 | 45.52 | 66.64 |
| ChartLlama ( Han et al., 2023 ) | 13B | 90.36 | 48.96 | 69.66 |
| Method | Setting | Reason. | Desc. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Human ( Wang et al., 2024b ) | lab | 80.50 | 92.10 |
| GPT-4o ( OpenAI, 2024 ) | closed | 47.10 | 84.45 |
| GPT-4V ( OpenAI, 2023 ) | closed | 37.10 | 79.92 |
| Claude 3 Sonnet ( Anthropic, 2024 ) | closed | 32.20 | 73.65 |
| InternVL Chat V1.5 ( Chen et al., 2024a ) | open | 29.20 | 58.50 |
| LLaVA-CoT ( Xu et al., 2025 ) | open | 27.40 | 55.80 |
| Method | ChartBench Avg |
|---|---|
| LLaVA-1.5 ( Liu et al., 2024 ) | 23.39 |
| ChartLlama ( Han et al., 2023 ) | 21.30 |
| Qwen-VL-Chat ( Wang et al., 2024a ) | 26.98 |
| DocOwl-1.5 ( Hu et al., 2024 ) | 31.89 |
| InternLM-XComposer-v2 ( Dong et al., 2024 ) | 47.78 |
| STEER | 51.00 |
| Method | Direct | CoT | PoT |
|---|---|---|---|
| Human ( Masry et al., 2025a ) | 85.02 | – | – |
| Claude 3.5 Sonnet ( Anthropic, 2024 ) | 43.58 | 55.81 | 48.05 |
| Gemini Flash 2.0 ( Team et al., 2023 ) | 46.85 | 53.66 | 51.44 |
| GPT-4o ( OpenAI, 2024 ) | 37.67 | 41.68 | 40.48 |
| Qwen2-VL-7B ( Wang et al., 2024a ) | 35.59 | 37.17 | 18.86 |
| InternVL2.5-8B ( Chen et al., 2024a ) | 35.67 | 31.99 | 23.88 |
| Variant | ChartQA | CharXiv R | QAPro CoT |
|---|---|---|---|
| LLaVA-CoT | 76.40 | 27.40 | 29.80 |
| +CSGE | 79.20 | 30.10 | 34.50 |
| +EASR | 78.55 | 30.55 | 35.20 |
| +WPSR | 78.10 | 29.20 | 33.10 |
| CSGE+EASR | 81.15 | 32.40 | 38.40 |
| Full | 82.70 | 33.60 | 40.70 |
| Method | Chart | Dashboard | Infographic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qwen2-VL-7B ( Wang et al., 2024a ) | 37.18 | 31.61 | 33.43 |
| LLaVA-CoT ( Xu et al., 2025 ) | 32.40 | 26.10 | 27.80 |
| STEER | 42.80 | 37.90 | 38.60 |
Chart Understanding
Chart understanding enables AI systems to read visualizations, recover their data, answer questions, and reason about what charts show.
See all 58 papers