ChartSumm: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Automatic Chart Summarization of Long and Short Summaries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automatic chart to text summarization is an effective tool for the visually impaired people along with providing precise insights of tabular data in natural language to the user. A large and well-structured dataset is always a key part for data driven models. In this paper, we propose ChartSumm: a large-scale benchmark dataset consisting of a total of 84,363 charts along with their metadata and descriptions covering a wide range of topics and chart types to generate short and long summaries. Extensive experiments with strong baseline models show that even though these models generate fluent and informative summaries by achieving decent scores in various automatic evaluation metrics, they often face issues like suffering from hallucination, missing out important data points, in addition to incorrect explanation of complex trends in the charts. We also investigated the potential of expanding ChartSumm to other languages using automated translation tools. These make our dataset a challenging benchmark for future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it