The Rational Agent Benchmark for Data Visualization
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding how helpful a visualization is from experimental results is difficult because the observed performance is confounded with aspects of the study design, such as how useful the information that is visualized is for the task. We develop a rational agent framework for designing and interpreting visualization experiments. Our framework conceives two experiments with the same setup: one with behavioral agents (human subjects), and the other one with a hypothetical rational agent. A visualization is evaluated by comparing the expected performance of behavioral agents to that of a rational agent under different assumptions. Using recent visualization decision studies from the literature, we demonstrate how the framework can be used to pre-experimentally evaluate the experiment design by bounding the expected improvement in performance from having access to visualizations, and post-experimentally to deconfound errors of information extraction from errors of optimization, among other analyses.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 7 Apr 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 6; 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
10 papers.
- 2024A Decision Theoretic Framework for Measuring AI Reliancecited by 26
- 2026SciVisAgentBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Scientific Data Analysis and Visualization Agentscited by 9
- 2025Conformal Prediction and Human Decision Makingcited by 8
- 2025Explaining and Improving Information Complementarities in Multi-Agent Decision-makingcited by 6
- 2024Designing Algorithmic Recommendations to Achieve Human-AI Complementaritycited by 4
- 2024Visualization for Trust in Machine Learning Revisited: The State of the Field in 2023cited by 3
- 2024Unexploited Information Value in Human-AI Collaborationcited by 1
- 2025Explanations are a Means to an End: Decision Theoretic Explanation Evaluationcited by 1
- 2024Underspecified Human Decision Experiments Considered Harmfulcited by 0
- 2024Trust Your Gut: Comparing Human and Machine Inference from Noisy Visualizationscited by 0
- 2026SciVisAgentBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Scientific Data Analysis and Visualization Agents31 Mar 2026
- 2025Explanations are a Means to an End: Decision Theoretic Explanation Evaluation28 Jun 2025
- 2025Conformal Prediction and Human Decision Making12 Mar 2025
- 2025Explaining and Improving Information Complementarities in Multi-Agent Decision-making10 Feb 2025
- 2024Unexploited Information Value in Human-AI Collaboration3 Nov 2024
- 2024Trust Your Gut: Comparing Human and Machine Inference from Noisy Visualizations23 Jul 2024
- 2024Designing Algorithmic Recommendations to Achieve Human-AI Complementarity2 May 2024
- 2024Visualization for Trust in Machine Learning Revisited: The State of the Field in 202318 Mar 2024
- 2024A Decision Theoretic Framework for Measuring AI Reliance27 Jan 2024
- 2024Underspecified Human Decision Experiments Considered Harmful25 Jan 2024