arXiv subjects

Aparna Garimella

Publications and source records attributed to Aparna Garimella.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

A Good Talk Does not Look Like a Summary, It Teaches You! Measuring Takeaways from Paper-to-Video Talks

Automatically generated videos from scientific papers are increasingly used for education and research dissemination. However, existing evaluation metrics mainly measure visual quality or whether key points from the paper appear in the video without assessing whether the video actually helps viewers understand the ideas. We introduce EffectivePresentationScorer, a framework for evaluating the instructional quality of scientific presentation videos. It checks whether a video explains the main ideas clearly, introduces needed background concepts, and connects technical details to the main contribution of the paper. When we apply EffectivePresentationScorer to the existing paper-to-video generation systems, we find that generated videos mention the correct topics and follow the structure of the paper but fail to explain prerequisite concepts or clarify why the method works. These failures are often ignored by existing video evaluation metrics, which focus on content presence rather than explanatory quality.

cs.MM↗

arXiv2026

TabReX : Tabular Referenceless eXplainable Evaluation

Evaluating the quality of tables generated by large language models (LLMs) remains an open challenge: existing metrics either flatten tables into text, ignoring structure, or rely on fixed references that limit generalization. We present TabReX, a reference-less, property-driven framework for evaluating tabular generation via graph-based reasoning. TabReX converts both source text and generated tables into canonical knowledge graphs, aligns them through an LLM-guided matching process, and computes interpretable, rubric-aware scores that quantify structural and factual fidelity. The resulting metric provides controllable trade-offs between sensitivity and specificity, yielding human-aligned judgments and cell-level error traces. To systematically asses metric robustness, we introduce TabReX-Bench, a large-scale benchmark spanning six domains and twelve planner-driven perturbation types across three difficulty tiers. Empirical results show that TabReX achieves the highest correlation with expert rankings, remains stable under harder perturbations, and enables fine-grained model-vs-prompt analysis establishing a new paradigm for trustworthy, explainable evaluation of structured generation systems.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

An Answer is just the Start: Related Insight Generation for Open-Ended Document-Grounded QA

Answering open-ended questions remains challenging for AI systems because it requires synthesis, judgment, and exploration beyond factual retrieval, and users often refine answers through multiple iterations rather than accepting a single response. Existing QA benchmarks do not explicitly support this refinement process. To address this gap, we introduce a new task, document-grounded related insight generation, where the goal is to generate additional insights from a document collection that help improve, extend, or rethink an initial answer to an open-ended question, ultimately supporting richer user interaction and a better overall question answering experience. We curate and release SCOpE-QA (Scientific Collections for Open-Ended QA), a dataset of 3,000 open-ended questions across 20 research collections. We present InsightGen, a two-stage approach that first constructs a thematic representation of the document collection using clustering, and then selects related context based on neighborhood selection from the thematic graph to generate diverse and relevant insights using LLMs. Extensive evaluation on 3,000 questions using two generation models and two evaluation settings shows that InsightGen consistently produces useful, relevant, and actionable insights, establishing a strong baseline for this new task.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Decisive: Guiding User Decisions with Optimal Preference Elicitation from Unstructured Documents

Decision-making is a cognitively intensive task that requires synthesizing relevant information from multiple unstructured sources, weighing competing factors, and incorporating subjective user preferences. Existing methods, including large language models and traditional decision-support systems, fall short: they often overwhelm users with information or fail to capture nuanced preferences accurately. We present Decisive, an interactive decision-making framework that combines document-grounded reasoning with Bayesian preference inference. Our approach grounds decisions in an objective option-scoring matrix extracted from source documents, while actively learning a user's latent preference vector through targeted elicitation. Users answer pairwise tradeoff questions adaptively selected to maximize information gain over the final decision. This process converges efficiently, minimizing user effort while ensuring recommendations remain transparent and personalized. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that our approach significantly outperforms both general-purpose LLMs and existing decision-making frameworks achieving up to 20% improvement in decision accuracy over strong baselines across domains.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

MARCH: Evaluating the Intersection of Ambiguity Interpretation and Multi-hop Inference

Real-world multi-hop QA is naturally linked with ambiguity, where a single query can trigger multiple reasoning paths that require independent resolution. Since ambiguity can occur at any stage, models must navigate layered uncertainty throughout the entire reasoning chain. Despite its prevalence in real-world user queries, previous benchmarks have primarily focused on single-hop ambiguity, leaving the complex interaction between multi-step inference and layered ambiguity underexplored. In this paper, we introduce MARCH, a benchmark for their intersection, with 2,209 multi-hop ambiguous questions curated via multi-LLM verification and validated by human annotation with strong agreement. Our experiments reveal that even state-of-the-art models struggle with MARCH, confirming that combining ambiguity resolution with multi-step reasoning is a significant challenge. To address this, we propose CLARION, a two-stage agentic framework that explicitly decouples ambiguity planning from evidence-driven reasoning, significantly outperforms existing approaches, and paves the way for robust reasoning systems.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Moneyball with LLMs: Analyzing Tabular Summarization in Sports Narratives

Large language model (LLM) approaches to tabular summarization rely on extensive prompt engineering, decomposition pipelines, or entity-level intermediate representations to achieve strong performance. While effective, these strategies are computationally expensive and offer limited insight into how well models maintain state over long, evolving narratives. We introduce SPORTABSET, a diagnostic benchmark for long-context tabular summarization across two complementary sports domains that require tracking multiple entities and aggregating statistics under domain-specific rules. Using SporTabSet, we systematically evaluate decomposition-based strategies across several long context LLMs. Results show that although decomposition substantially improves accuracy and numerical fidelity, gains stem mainly from dissecting multi-entity interference rather than improved local arithmetic. Robustness experiments further reveal high sensitivity to surface-level cues with structured failures, including hallucination, omission, and role confusion. Together, these findings identify consistent multientity memory as a key bottleneck in long context table generation, motivating diagnostic evaluation as a prerequisite for scalable, efficient and reliable tabular summarization models.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Knowing What's Missing: Assessing Information Sufficiency in Question Answering

Determining whether a provided context contains sufficient information to answer a question is a critical challenge for building reliable question-answering systems. While simple prompting strategies have shown success on factual questions, they frequently fail on inferential ones that require reasoning beyond direct text extraction. We hypothesize that asking a model to first reason about what specific information is missing provides a more reliable, implicit signal for assessing overall sufficiency. To this end, we propose a structured Identify-then-Verify framework for robust sufficiency modeling. Our method first generates multiple hypotheses about missing information and establishes a semantic consensus. It then performs a critical verification step, forcing the model to re-examine the source text to confirm whether this information is truly absent. We evaluate our method against established baselines across diverse multi-hop and factual QA datasets. The results demonstrate that by guiding the model to justify its claims about missing information, our framework produces more accurate sufficiency judgments while clearly articulating any information gaps.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Modeling Contextual Passage Utility for Multihop Question Answering

Multihop Question Answering (QA) requires systems to identify and synthesize information from multiple text passages. While most prior retrieval methods assist in identifying relevant passages for QA, further assessing the utility of the passages can help in removing redundant ones, which may otherwise add to noise and inaccuracies in the generated answers. Existing utility prediction approaches model passage utility independently, overlooking a critical aspect of multihop reasoning: the utility of a passage can be context-dependent, influenced by its relation to other passages - whether it provides complementary information or forms a crucial link in conjunction with others. In this paper, we propose a lightweight approach to model contextual passage utility, accounting for inter-passage dependencies. We fine-tune a small transformer-based model to predict passage utility scores for multihop QA. We leverage the reasoning traces from an advanced reasoning model to capture the order in which passages are used to answer a question and obtain synthetic training data. Through comprehensive experiments, we demonstrate that our utility-based scoring of retrieved passages leads to improved reranking and downstream QA performance compared to relevance-based reranking methods.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Towards Region-aware Bias Evaluation Metrics

When exposed to human-generated data, language models are known to learn and amplify societal biases. While previous works introduced benchmarks that can be used to assess the bias in these models, they rely on assumptions that may not be universally true. For instance, a gender bias dimension commonly used by these metrics is that of family--career, but this may not be the only common bias in certain regions of the world. In this paper, we identify topical differences in gender bias across different regions and propose a region-aware bottom-up approach for bias assessment. Our proposed approach uses gender-aligned topics for a given region and identifies gender bias dimensions in the form of topic pairs that are likely to capture gender societal biases. Several of our proposed bias topic pairs are on par with human perception of gender biases in these regions in comparison to the existing ones, and we also identify new pairs that are more aligned than the existing ones. In addition, we use our region-aware bias topic pairs in a Word Embedding Association Test (WEAT)-based evaluation metric to test for gender biases across different regions in different data domains. We also find that LLMs have a higher alignment to bias pairs for highly-represented regions showing the importance of region-aware bias evaluation metric.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Doc2Chart: Intent-Driven Zero-Shot Chart Generation from Documents

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated strong capabilities in transforming text descriptions or tables to data visualizations via instruction-tuning methods. However, it is not straightforward to apply these methods directly for a more real-world use case of visualizing data from long documents based on user-given intents, as opposed to the user pre-selecting the relevant content manually. We introduce the task of intent-based chart generation from documents: given a user-specified intent and document(s), the goal is to generate a chart adhering to the intent and grounded on the document(s) in a zero-shot setting. We propose an unsupervised, two-staged framework in which an LLM first extracts relevant information from the document(s) by decomposing the intent and iteratively validates and refines this data. Next, a heuristic-guided module selects an appropriate chart type before final code generation. To assess the data accuracy of the generated charts, we propose an attribution-based metric that uses a structured textual representation of charts, instead of relying on visual decoding metrics that often fail to capture the chart data effectively. To validate our approach, we curate a dataset comprising of 1,242 $<$intent, document, charts$>$ tuples from two domains, finance and scientific, in contrast to the existing datasets that are largely limited to parallel text descriptions/ tables and their corresponding charts. We compare our approach with baselines using single-shot chart generation using LLMs and query-based retrieval methods; our method outperforms by upto $9$ points and $17$ points in terms of chart data accuracy and chart type respectively over the best baselines.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

RADAR: A Reasoning-Guided Attribution Framework for Explainable Visual Data Analysis

Data visualizations like charts are fundamental tools for quantitative analysis and decision-making across fields, requiring accurate interpretation and mathematical reasoning. The emergence of Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) offers promising capabilities for automated visual data analysis, such as processing charts, answering questions, and generating summaries. However, they provide no visibility into which parts of the visual data informed their conclusions; this black-box nature poses significant challenges to real-world trust and adoption. In this paper, we take the first major step towards evaluating and enhancing the capabilities of MLLMs to attribute their reasoning process by highlighting the specific regions in charts and graphs that justify model answers. To this end, we contribute RADAR, a semi-automatic approach to obtain a benchmark dataset comprising 17,819 diverse samples with charts, questions, reasoning steps, and attribution annotations. We also introduce a method that provides attribution for chart-based mathematical reasoning. Experimental results demonstrate that our reasoning-guided approach improves attribution accuracy by 15% compared to baseline methods, and enhanced attribution capabilities translate to stronger answer generation, achieving an average BERTScore of $\sim$ 0.90, indicating high alignment with ground truth responses. This advancement represents a significant step toward more interpretable and trustworthy chart analysis systems, enabling users to verify and understand model decisions through reasoning and attribution.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

SMART-Editor: A Multi-Agent Framework for Human-Like Design Editing with Structural Integrity

We present SMART-Editor, a framework for compositional layout and content editing across structured (posters, websites) and unstructured (natural images) domains. Unlike prior models that perform local edits, SMART-Editor preserves global coherence through two strategies: Reward-Refine, an inference-time rewardguided refinement method, and RewardDPO, a training-time preference optimization approach using reward-aligned layout pairs. To evaluate model performance, we introduce SMARTEdit-Bench, a benchmark covering multi-domain, cascading edit scenarios. SMART-Editor outperforms strong baselines like InstructPix2Pix and HIVE, with RewardDPO achieving up to 15% gains in structured settings and Reward-Refine showing advantages on natural images. Automatic and human evaluations confirm the value of reward-guided planning in producing semantically consistent and visually aligned edits.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Infogen: Generating Complex Statistical Infographics from Documents

Statistical infographics are powerful tools that simplify complex data into visually engaging and easy-to-understand formats. Despite advancements in AI, particularly with LLMs, existing efforts have been limited to generating simple charts, with no prior work addressing the creation of complex infographics from text-heavy documents that demand a deep understanding of the content. We address this gap by introducing the task of generating statistical infographics composed of multiple sub-charts (e.g., line, bar, pie) that are contextually accurate, insightful, and visually aligned. To achieve this, we define infographic metadata that includes its title and textual insights, along with sub-chart-specific details such as their corresponding data and alignment. We also present Infodat, the first benchmark dataset for text-to-infographic metadata generation, where each sample links a document to its metadata. We propose Infogen, a two-stage framework where fine-tuned LLMs first generate metadata, which is then converted into infographic code. Extensive evaluations on Infodat demonstrate that Infogen achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming both closed and open-source LLMs in text-to-statistical infographic generation.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

LegalCore: A Dataset for Event Coreference Resolution in Legal Documents

Recognizing events and their coreferential mentions in a document is essential for understanding semantic meanings of text. The existing research on event coreference resolution is mostly limited to news articles. In this paper, we present the first dataset for the legal domain, LegalCore, which has been annotated with comprehensive event and event coreference information. The legal contract documents we annotated in this dataset are several times longer than news articles, with an average length of around 25k tokens per document. The annotations show that legal documents have dense event mentions and feature both short-distance and super long-distance coreference links between event mentions. We further benchmark mainstream Large Language Models (LLMs) on this dataset for both event detection and event coreference resolution tasks, and find that this dataset poses significant challenges for state-of-the-art open-source and proprietary LLMs, which perform significantly worse than a supervised baseline. We will publish the dataset as well as the code.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Is This a Bad Table? A Closer Look at the Evaluation of Table Generation from Text

Understanding whether a generated table is of good quality is important to be able to use it in creating or editing documents using automatic methods. In this work, we underline that existing measures for table quality evaluation fail to capture the overall semantics of the tables, and sometimes unfairly penalize good tables and reward bad ones. We propose TabEval, a novel table evaluation strategy that captures table semantics by first breaking down a table into a list of natural language atomic statements and then compares them with ground truth statements using entailment-based measures. To validate our approach, we curate a dataset comprising of text descriptions for 1,250 diverse Wikipedia tables, covering a range of topics and structures, in contrast to the limited scope of existing datasets. We compare TabEval with existing metrics using unsupervised and supervised text-to-table generation methods, demonstrating its stronger correlation with human judgments of table quality across four datasets.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

SciDoc2Diagrammer-MAF: Towards Generation of Scientific Diagrams from Documents guided by Multi-Aspect Feedback Refinement

Automating the creation of scientific diagrams from academic papers can significantly streamline the development of tutorials, presentations, and posters, thereby saving time and accelerating the process. Current text-to-image models struggle with generating accurate and visually appealing diagrams from long-context inputs. We propose SciDoc2Diagram, a task that extracts relevant information from scientific papers and generates diagrams, along with a benchmarking dataset, SciDoc2DiagramBench. We develop a multi-step pipeline SciDoc2Diagrammer that generates diagrams based on user intentions using intermediate code generation. We observed that initial diagram drafts were often incomplete or unfaithful to the source, leading us to develop SciDoc2Diagrammer-Multi-Aspect-Feedback (MAF), a refinement strategy that significantly enhances factual correctness and visual appeal and outperforms existing models on both automatic and human judgement.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

Unraveling the Truth: Do VLMs really Understand Charts? A Deep Dive into Consistency and Robustness

Chart question answering (CQA) is a crucial area of Visual Language Understanding. However, the robustness and consistency of current Visual Language Models (VLMs) in this field remain under-explored. This paper evaluates state-of-the-art VLMs on comprehensive datasets, developed specifically for this study, encompassing diverse question categories and chart formats. We investigate two key aspects: 1) the models' ability to handle varying levels of chart and question complexity, and 2) their robustness across different visual representations of the same underlying data. Our analysis reveals significant performance variations based on question and chart types, highlighting both strengths and weaknesses of current models. Additionally, we identify areas for improvement and propose future research directions to build more robust and reliable CQA systems. This study sheds light on the limitations of current models and paves the way for future advancements in the field.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

FABLES: Evaluating faithfulness and content selection in book-length summarization

While long-context large language models (LLMs) can technically summarize book-length documents (>100K tokens), the length and complexity of the documents have so far prohibited evaluations of input-dependent aspects like faithfulness. In this paper, we conduct the first large-scale human evaluation of faithfulness and content selection on LLM-generated summaries of fictional books. Our study mitigates the issue of data contamination by focusing on summaries of books published in 2023 or 2024, and we hire annotators who have fully read each book prior to the annotation task to minimize cost and cognitive burden. We collect FABLES, a dataset of annotations on 3,158 claims made in LLM-generated summaries of 26 books, at a cost of $5.2K USD, which allows us to rank LLM summarizers based on faithfulness: Claude-3-Opus significantly outperforms all closed-source LLMs, while the open-source Mixtral is on par with GPT-3.5-Turbo. An analysis of the annotations reveals that most unfaithful claims relate to events and character states, and they generally require indirect reasoning over the narrative to invalidate. While LLM-based auto-raters have proven reliable for factuality and coherence in other settings, we implement several LLM raters of faithfulness and find that none correlates strongly with human annotations, especially with regard to detecting unfaithful claims. Our experiments suggest that detecting unfaithful claims is an important future direction not only for summarization evaluation but also as a testbed for long-context understanding. Finally, we move beyond faithfulness by exploring content selection errors in book-length summarization: we develop a typology of omission errors related to crucial narrative elements and also identify a systematic over-emphasis on events occurring towards the end of the book.

cs.CL↗