mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Assessing Graphical Perception of Image Embedding Models using Channel Effectiveness

arXiv 2407.20845 ↗First posted 30 Jul 2024cs.CV cs.HC cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent advancements in vision models have greatly improved their ability to handle complex chart understanding tasks, like chart captioning and question answering. However, it remains challenging to assess how these models process charts. Existing benchmarks only roughly evaluate model performance without evaluating the underlying mechanisms, such as how models extract image embeddings. This limits our understanding of the model's ability to perceive fundamental graphical components. To address this, we introduce a novel evaluation framework to assess the graphical perception of image embedding models. For chart comprehension, we examine two main aspects of channel effectiveness: accuracy and discriminability of various visual channels. Channel accuracy is assessed through the linearity of embeddings, measuring how well the perceived magnitude aligns with the size of the stimulus. Discriminability is evaluated based on the distances between embeddings, indicating their distinctness. Our experiments with the CLIP model show that it perceives channel accuracy differently from humans and shows unique discriminability in channels like length, tilt, and curvature. We aim to develop this work into a broader benchmark for reliable visual encoders, enhancing models for precise chart comprehension and human-like perception in future applications.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Jul 2024.

Builds on

24 of 40 references.

References · 24

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  3. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 29,915
  4. 2023Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 7,792
  5. 2022Flamingo: a Visual Language Model for Few-Shot Learningcited by 4,337
  6. 2015Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classificationcited by 3,590
  7. 2023InstructBLIP: Towards General-purpose Vision-Language Models with Instruction Tuningcited by 2,855
  8. 2015VQA: Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,489
  9. 2022ChartQA: A Benchmark for Question Answering about Charts with Visual and Logical Reasoningcited by 1,449
  10. 2014Show and Tell: A Neural Image Caption Generatorcited by 877
  11. 2022MedCLIP: Contrastive Learning from Unpaired Medical Images and Textcited by 564
  12. 2023ChartLlama: A Multimodal LLM for Chart Understanding and Generationcited by 158
12 more
  1. 2023ChartBench: A Benchmark for Complex Visual Reasoning in Chartscited by 116
  2. 2023VisText: A Benchmark for Semantically Rich Chart Captioningcited by 111
  3. 2019Contextual Encoder-Decoder Network for Visual Saliency Predictioncited by 44
  4. 2022Contrastive language and vision learning of general fashion conceptscited by 41
  5. 2017Comparing deep neural networks against humans: object recognition when the signal gets weakercited by 34
  6. 2018Chart-Text: A Fully Automated Chart Image Descriptorcited by 20
  7. 2023CLAMS: A Cluster Ambiguity Measure for Estimating Perceptual Variability in Visual Clusteringcited by 8
  8. 2022Seeing What You Believe or Believing What You See? Belief Biases Correlation Estimationcited by 5
  9. 2019Discriminability Tests for Visualization Effectiveness and Scalabilitycited by 3
  10. 2023Computational Approaches for App-to-App Retrieval and Design Consistency Checkcited by 3
  11. 2023What Does the Chart Say? Grouping Cues Guide Viewer Comparisons and Conclusions in Bar Chartscited by 3
  12. 2024Same Data, Diverging Perspectives: The Power of Visualizations to Elicit Competing Interpretationscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.