REVIEW 2 cited by
Drawing Pandas: A Benchmark for LLMs in Generating Plotting Code
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
This paper introduces the human-curated PandasPlotBench dataset, designed to evaluate language models' effectiveness as assistants in visual data exploration. Our benchmark focuses on generating code for visualizing tabular data - such as a Pandas DataFrame - based on natural language instructions, complementing current evaluation tools and expanding their scope. The dataset includes 175 unique tasks. Our experiments assess several leading Large Language Models (LLMs) across three visualization libraries: Matplotlib, Seaborn, and Plotly. We show that the shortening of tasks has a minimal effect on plotting capabilities, allowing for the user interface that accommodates concise user input without sacrificing functionality or accuracy. Another of our findings reveals that while LLMs perform well with popular libraries like Matplotlib and Seaborn, challenges persist with Plotly, highlighting areas for improvement. We hope that the modular design of our benchmark will broaden the current studies on generating visualizations. Our dataset and benchmark code are available online: https://huggingface.co/datasets/JetBrains-Research/PandasPlotBench; https://github.com/JetBrains-Research/PandasPlotBench.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
SciVisAgentBench: A Benchmark for Evaluating Scientific Data Analysis and Visualization Agents
SciVisAgentBench provides 108 expert-crafted tasks and a mixed LLM-plus-deterministic evaluation pipeline for benchmarking AI agents that perform scientific visualization workflows.
-
MLDebugging: Towards Benchmarking Code Debugging Across Multi-Library Scenarios
MLDebugging: a new benchmark of 1,175 multi-library Python debugging tasks on which the best tested LLM, Llama-3.1-72B, passes only 58.7% of test cases.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.