How to Teach AI to Understand Charts: Analyzing the New ChartNet Dataset from MIT
IBM
Alibaba/Qwen
Google/DeepMind
OpenAI
Hugging Face
Researchers from MIT and IBM Research have introduced a multimodal dataset called ChartNet for training and testing models on chart analysis. The dataset includes 1.7 million synthetic examples covering 24 visualization types, with automatic verification and manually validated subsets. Fine-tuning open VLM models on ChartNet allowed models with 2–7 billion parameters to compete with large systems, occasionally surpassing GPT-4o.
Researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and IBM Research have created ChartNet, a multimodal dataset for training vision-language models (VLMs) to understand charts. The main problem with existing VLMs is the lack of high-quality and diverse data: GPT-4o correctly answers only 46% of tasks from the OGE (Basic State Exam), Gemini 2.5 Flash 65%, and Qwen3.7 Plus 83%. ChartNet addresses this issue through synthetic generation based on code: from 150,000 TinyChart graphs, Python code is recovered via a VLM, and then an LLM performs augmentations—changing the visualization type, library (Matplotlib, Seaborn, Plotly, Vega-Altair, Pygal, Plotnine), data, and styling. The result is 1.7 million examples for four tasks: code recovery, table extraction, text description, and question answering with reasoning. Quality control includes filtering of infeasible code (77% success rate), automatic defect checking (defect rate reduced from 15% to 6%), a manually verified set of 100,000 examples, 30,000 real-world charts, and 7,600 examples for sensitive topics. Fine-tuning on ChartNet significantly improved metrics for open VLMs: compact models (2–7 billion parameters) began to compete with larger ones, with Granite-Vision-3.3-2B achieving the best result in five out of seven metrics, surpassing GPT-4o. Generalizability was confirmed on the ChartCap and ChartMimic-v2 benchmarks, with metrics increasing without exception. Limitations: possible generation errors due to the use of LLMs/VLMs, potential distribution mismatch of synthetic data with real data, and unclear applicability of the effect for strong models.
Source: Habr — хаб NLP —
original
