An Empirical Study of Bugs in Data Visualization Libraries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data visualization (DataViz) libraries play a crucial role in presentation, data analysis, and application development, underscoring the importance of their accuracy in transforming data into visual representations. Incorrect visualizations can adversely impact user experience, distort information conveyance, and influence user perception and decision-making processes. Visual bugs in these libraries can be particularly insidious as they may not cause obvious errors like crashes, but instead mislead users of the underlying data graphically, resulting in wrong decision making. Consequently, a good understanding of the unique characteristics of bugs in DataViz libraries is essential for researchers and developers to detect and fix bugs in DataViz libraries. This study presents the first comprehensive analysis of bugs in DataViz libraries, examining 564 bugs collected from five widely-used libraries. Our study systematically analyzes their symptoms and root causes, and provides a detailed taxonomy. We found that incorrect/inaccurate plots are pervasive in DataViz libraries and incorrect graphic computation is the major root cause, which necessitates further automated testing methods for DataViz libraries. Moreover, we identified eight key steps to trigger such bugs and two test oracles specific to DataViz libraries, which may inspire future research in designing effective automated testing techniques. Furthermore, with the recent advancements in Vision Language Models (VLMs), we explored the feasibility of applying these models to detect incorrect/inaccurate plots. The results show that the effectiveness of VLMs in bug detection varies from 29% to 57%, depending on the prompts, and adding more information in prompts does not necessarily increase the effectiveness. Our findings offer valuable insights into the nature and patterns of bugs in DataViz libraries, providing a foundation for developers and researchers to improve library reliability, and ultimately benefit more accurate and reliable data visualizations across various domains.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.188 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".