ChartEvo: Self-Evolving Agent Harnesses for Long-Tail Chart Reasoning
Authors: Qi Wang, Peijie Wang, Jun Cao, Haoyang Tong, Xiao-Hui Li, Fei Yin, Cheng-Lin Liu
Organizations: State Key Laboratory of Multimodal Artificial Intelligence Systems, CASIA · School of Artificial Intelligence, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · New Laboratory of Pattern Recognition, CASIA · Zhongguancun Academy
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have substantially advanced chart understanding and reasoning, yet their performance remains highly uneven across chart types. While modern MLLMs perform well on common charts, their accuracy drops sharply on long-tail charts with diverse visual structures and reasoning requirements. Tool-augmented agents can improve complex chart reasoning by introducing specialized visual capabilities, but manually engineering strategies and tools for the heterogeneous and evolving long tail is difficult to scale. We introduce ChartEvo, a recursive self-improvement framework that enables chart agents to adapt to underperforming chart types through experience-driven harness-level self-improvement. ChartEvo jointly evolves reusable chart-specific Skills and executable Tools, while learning reusable local tool-call chains to compose evolved capabilities and control the inference overhead of tool-augmented reasoning. On long-tail charts from ChartBench and ChartX, ChartEvo improves accuracy over its base MLLM, Qwen3.7-Plus, by 45.6% and 32.5%, respectively, demonstrating the effectiveness of recursive self-improvement for long-tail chart adaptation.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Representative well-performing and underperforming chart types in ChartBench test split.
Figure 2: Illustrative comparison of chart reasoning approaches. Direct MLLMs and fixed-tool agents can misinterpret chart encodings. ChartEvo evolves skills and tools into validated, reusable Self-Evolving Local Toolchains (SELT), enabling evidence-grounded reasoning through a single toolchain invocation.
Figure 3: Overview of ChartEvo. (A) Harness self-evolution jointly updates Skills, Tools, and SELT using answer evaluation and execution feedback, retaining validated updates for subsequent rounds. (B) With the harness frozen at test time, the rose-chart example illustrates five local reasoning stages within a single SELT invocation.
Method
Area
3Dbar-multi
3D-stack
Ring
Sector
Radar-M
Radar-MF
Radar-S
Stock
Avg.
Direct Visual MLLMs
DeepSeek-v4.1-Flash
30.0
38.0
12.0
28.0
44.0
14.0
26.0
12.0
80.0
31.6
Qwen3.7-Plus
60.0
42.0
14.0
48.0
46.0
38.0
46.0
54.0
84.0
48.0
Qwen3.8-27B
36.0
42.0
20.0
34.0
42.0
42.0
48.0
26.0
86.0
41.8
Qwen3.8-Max
84.0
44.0
30.0
72.0
74.0
74.0
70.0
78.0
86.0
68.0
Kimi-K2.6
30.0
42.0
14.0
38.0
46.0
48.0
40.0
38.0
86.0
42.4
Table 1: Comparison on ChartBench. NQA accuracy (%) on nine long-tail chart types. The best and second-best results are highlighted in bold and underline , respectively.
Method
Radar
3D-Bar
Rose
Area
Bubble
Multi-axes
Treemap
Ring
Avg.
Direct Visual MLLMs
DeepSeek-v4.1-flash
4.2
25.0
35.9
28.0
62.5
46.2
75.6
70.3
43.4
Qwen3.7-Plus
16.7
21.4
46.2
48.0
65.6
79.5
75.6
75.7
53.6
Qwen3.8-27B
8.3
14.3
43.6
40.0
62.5
56.4
75.6
67.6
46.0
Qwen3.8-Max
54.2
32.1
79.5
84.0
87.5
89.7
87.8
67.6
72.8
Kimi-K2.6
12.5
28.6
61.5
40.0
75.0
74.4
58.5
75.7
53.3
Table 2: Comparison on ChartX. NQA accuracy (%) on eight long-tail chart types. The best and second-best results are highlighted in bold and underline , respectively.
Method
Tokens ↓
Time (s) ↓
Qwen3.7-Plus
2,454.5
42.71
Qwen3.8-27B
672.1
11.90
Qwen3.8-Max
2,975.4
61.79
Kimi-K2.6
3,612.1
46.70
DeepSeek-v4.1-Flash
8,193.7
84.29
ChartEvo (Ours)
2,907.0
68.76
Table 3: Comparison of Inference Costs. Average inference cost per question across ChartBench and ChartX. Lower values indicate lower cost.
Configuration
Accuracy (%)
Base MLLM (Qwen3.7-Plus)
42.8
with Evolved Skill-only
55.6
with Base Harness
57.2
with Evolved Tools
84.4
ChartEvo (Full)
94.8
Table 4: Ablation of Skill and Tool Evolution. NQA accuracy (%) on five ChartBench chart types.
Figure 4: Per-type NQA accuracy on five ChartBench chart types.
Execution Path
Ratio (%)
Accuracy (%)
Chain-based Completion
77.9
98.0
Direct Visual Answering
9.9
94.4
Fallback
12.2
44.8
Average Calls per Question
Avg. API Calls
2.30
Avg. Tool Calls
5.52
Table 5: Inference Execution Statistics. Execution path distribution, accuracy, and inference costs across ChartBench and ChartX.
Configuration
Acc. (%)
API Calls
Tool Calls
w/o SELT
91.2
6.19
5.41
ChartEvo (Full)
94.8
2.73
5.27
Table 6: SELT Ablation on ChartBench. Comparison of inference accuracy and execution costs with and without persistent SELT across five chart types.
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Component
Initial
ChartBench
ChartX
Distinct Skills
4
13 (+9)
12 (+8)
Available Tools
25
42 (+17)
60 (+35)
Active SELT
0
20
71
Appendix
Table 7: Harness Growth Through Self-Evolution. Comparison of harness components before and after self-evolution on ChartBench and ChartX.
Figure 5: Illustrative self-evolution of ChartEvo on a dot-ring chart. An initial measurement failure triggers joint Skill, Tool, and SELT evolution, enabling accurate dot-count-based reasoning and capability reuse across additional chart instances.
Skill
Reasoning and Capability-Use Guidance
chart-evidence-validation
Reuse validated observations, distinguish rejected from advisory evidence, preserve numerical semantics, and avoid ambiguous bindings or invalid observation references.
bar-value
Guide legend and category binding, axis calibration, bar localization, and numerical projection, with handling of stacked segments and negative bars.
line-value
Guide series localization, point extraction, and axis projection, while addressing error-bar anchors, ambiguous candidates, and coordinate consistency.
pie-percentage
Guide color and label binding, segment measurement, and percentage estimation using geometric and area-based evidence.
Appendix
Table 8: Initial Skill inventory of ChartEvo before self-evolution, summarizing the reasoning and capability-use guidance provided by each Skill.
Tool
Functionality
OCR, Text, Color, and Segmentation (7)
locate_text
Locate visible text labels and return their bounding boxes and positions.
annotate_legend
Identify specified legend labels and construct their spatial mappings.
get_marker_rgb
Extract the RGB color of a marker associated with a legend label.
get_embedded_label_rgb
Extract the underlying fill color associated with an embedded data label.
clean_chart_image
Remove detected textual regions to produce a cleaned chart image.
Appendix
Table 9: Initial Tool inventory of ChartEvo before self-evolution. The 25 generic Tools are grouped by their primary functionalities.
Figure 6: Successful reasoning on a 3D grouped bar chart. ChartEvo coordinates multiple Tool calls to extract structured evidence and accurately estimate the target value.
Figure 7: Error recovery on a treemap. ChartEvo switches segmentation strategies after an initial failure and corrects an invalid Tool argument, ultimately producing an accurate percentage estimate.
Figure 8: Failure case on a 3D stacked bar chart. Uncertain segment boundaries prevent precise measurement, while the Agent adopts an unreliable estimate, leading to an incorrect answer.
Charts are ubiquitous in scientific and financial literature for presenting structured data. However, chart reasoning remains challenging for multimodal large language models (MLLMs) due to the lack of high-quality training data, as well as the need for fine-grained visual grounding and precise numerical computation. To address these challenges, we first propose DuoChart, a scalable dual-source data pipeline that combines synthesized charts with real-world charts to construct diverse, high-quality chart training data. We then introduce CharTool, which equips MLLMs with external tools, including image cropping for localized visual perception and code-based computation for accurate numerical reasoning. Through agentic reinforcement learning on DuoChart, CharTool learns tool-integrated reasoning grounded in chart content. Extensive experiments on six chart benchmarks show that our method consistently improves over strong MLLM baselines across model scales. Notably, CharTool-7B outperforms the base model by +8.0% on CharXiv (Reasoning) and +9.78% on ChartQAPro, while achieving competitive performance with substantially larger or proprietary models. Moreover, CharTool demonstrates positive generalization to out-of-domain visual math reasoning benchmarks.
Situo Zhang, Yifan Zhang, Zichen Zhu +6
X-LANCE Lab, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China · East China Normal University, Shanghai, China · Shanghai Innovation Institution, Shanghai, China +1
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are rapidly evolving with expanded context windows and stronger reasoning capabilities, enabling multi-chart understanding and multi-step inference. These abilities are increasingly important as MLLMs are adopted in complex agentic tasks. However, existing benchmarks largely emphasize single-chart perception, while simple chart-to-chart connections are insufficient to evaluate these capabilities. To capture multi-chart complexity while ensuring consistency and validity, we design a synthesis pipeline supported by latent graphs. Building on this pipeline, we introduce LongChart, a benchmark whose VQA sets contain an average of 6.5 images and 31.2 questions. We evaluate 10 state-of-the-art MLLMs and examine three factors that influence performance: reasoning patterns, auxiliary tools, and robustness to image perturbations. Our results show that MLLM accuracy decreases and varies substantially as computational complexity increases, highlighting directions for future research in multi-chart reasoning.
Chart editing requires inferring and modifying visualization code from a reference chart image based on an editing instruction, challenging fine-grained visual reasoning, instruction following, and executable code synthesis capabilities of MLLMs. Large reasoning models (LRMs) with extended Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning are suitable for tackling such complex multimodal tasks. However, our preliminary study reveals an inverted-U'' relationship between reasoning length and chart-editing performance: Excessive reasoning often leads to overthinking,'' where models drift toward hallucinated visual details or get stuck in redundant reasoning loops. To address the gap, we introduce REChart, a two-stage training framework that provides process-level supervision over intermediate reasoning steps, improving both editing fidelity and reasoning efficiency. First, we synthesize 200k high-quality reasoning trajectories for supervised fine-tuning from a large image-instruction-code pool, using a role-specialized agentic Reason-Score-Refine workflow that iteratively refine the chart code toward higher quality. Second, we optimize the model via reinforcement learning with two complementary rewards: a fidelity reward evaluating code correctness, visual fidelity, and structural consistency, and an efficiency reward that assigns each rollout a random thinking budget, truncates the reasoning process, and credits the final reasoning segment according to its contribution to the output. On the ChartEdit and ChartMIMIC benchmarks, our model achieves state-of-the-art chart-editing performance among open-source models of comparable scale, while mitigating overthinking and reducing average reasoning token usage by 79.0% under a maximum thinking budget of 16,384 tokens compared with the base model.