When Visuals Aren't the Problem: Evaluating Vision-Language Models on Misleading Data Visualizations
Harsh Nishant Lalai, Raj Sanjay Shah, Hanspeter Pfister, Sashank Varma, Grace Guo

TL;DR
This paper evaluates vision-language models on their ability to detect misleading data visualizations and captions, revealing strengths in visual design error detection but challenges in reasoning-based misinformation.
Contribution
It introduces a benchmark with real-world visualizations and curated misleading captions to analyze VLMs' detection capabilities across various error types.
Findings
Models detect visual design errors more reliably than reasoning errors.
VLMs often misclassify non-misleading visualizations as deceptive.
The benchmark enables controlled analysis of different error categories.
Abstract
Visualizations help communicate data insights, but deceptive data representations can distort their interpretation and propagate misinformation. While recent Vision Language Models (VLMs) perform well on many chart understanding tasks, their ability to detect misleading visualizations, especially when deception arises from subtle reasoning errors in captions, remains poorly understood. Here, we evaluate VLMs on misleading visualization-caption pairs grounded in a fine-grained taxonomy of reasoning errors (e.g., Cherry-picking, Causal inference) and visualization design errors (e.g., Truncated axis, Dual axis, inappropriate encodings). To this end, we develop a benchmark that combines real-world visualization with human-authored, curated misleading captions designed to elicit specific reasoning and visualization error types, enabling controlled analysis across error categories and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
