Chart QA

Accurate chart comprehension represents a critical challenge in advancing multimodal learning systems, as extensive information is compressed into structured visual representations. However, existing vision-language models (VLMs) frequently struggle to generalize on unseen charts because it requires abstract, symbolic, and quantitative reasoning over structured visual representations. In this work, we introduce Chart-RL, an effective reinforcement learning (RL) method that employs mathematically verifiable rewards to enhance chart question answering in VLMs. Our experiments demonstrate that Chart-RL consistently outperforms supervised fine-tuning (SFT) across different chart understanding benchmarks, achieving relative improvements of 16.7% on MutlChartQA, and 11.5% on ChartInsights. We conduct robustness analysis, where Chart-RL achieves enhanced performance in 18 of 25 perturbed chart categories, demonstrating strong consistency and reasoning capability across visual variations. Furthermore, we demonstrate that task difficulty and inherent complexity are more critical than data quantity in RL training. For instance, Chart-RL trained on merely 10 complex chart-query examples significantly outperforms models trained on over 6,000 simple examples. Additionally, training on challenging reasoning tasks not only improves in-domain generalization relative to simpler tasks, but also facilitate strong transfer to out-of-domain visual mathematical problems.

Prompting strategies affect LLM reasoning performance, but their role in chart-based QA remains underexplored. We present a systematic evaluation of four widely used prompting paradigms (Zero-Shot, Few-Shot, Zero-Shot Chain-of-Thought, and Few-Shot Chain-of-Thought) across GPT-3.5, GPT-4, and GPT-4o on the ChartQA dataset. Our framework operates exclusively on structured chart data, isolating prompt structure as the only experimental variable, and evaluates performance using two metrics: Accuracy and Exact Match. Results from 1,200 diverse ChartQA samples show that Few-Shot Chain-of-Thought prompting consistently yields the highest accuracy (up to 78.2%), particularly on reasoning-intensive questions, while Few-Shot prompting improves format adherence. Zero-Shot performs well only with high-capacity models on simpler tasks. These findings provide actionable guidance for selecting prompting strategies in structured data reasoning tasks, with implications for both efficiency and accuracy in real-world applications.

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used to automate chart generation from data tables, improving efficiency but introducing new misuse risks. We present ChartAttack, a framework for evaluating how MLLMs use design misleaders to generate charts that induce incorrect interpretations. We also introduce AttackViz, a chart question-answering (QA) dataset labeled with effective misleaders and their induced incorrect answers. ChartAttack reduces MLLM QA accuracy by 17.2 points in-domain and 11.9 points cross-domain. Conditional deception rates show targeted effects: correct answers shift to attacker-intended answers 11.2% of the time in-domain and 11.7-14.9% cross-domain, while originally incorrect answers rarely change. A controlled human study shows that ChartAttack-generated charts also reduce human QA performance. Finally, fine-tuning on AttackViz improves in-domain MLLM robustness to misleading charts. Our findings highlight the need for secure, robust MLLM chart generation. Code and data are publicly available on the project website.