让下一篇重要论文，不再错过。

VisCodeBench: a new benchmark dataset for Text-to-Vis reflecting real-world practice

Hy Nguyen, Thomas James Elton, Ella Wilson, Andrew Reeson, Cecile Paris, Josiah Poon, Jonathan K. Kummerfeld

Generating visualisations from natural language requests (text-to-vis) enables users to explore data more efficiently. While LLMs can complete simple visualisation requests, their performance on challenging ones is not well covered by existing benchmarks. We introduce VisCodeBench, an end-to-end text-to-vis benchmark with 2,672 samples from three different domains: educational, scientific, and general audience scenarios with varying levels of complexity. We benchmark three visualisation systems---Codex, Claude Code, and LIDA---paired with a range of open and commercial LLMs across seven metrics covering execution, chart content, and visual quality. While basic execution is near-solved for strong systems, no system comes close to reproducing the reference data, with the best displayed data similarity reaching only $0.81$ and falling to $0.69$ on our hardest subset for this metric. We further find that frontier models separate on chart correctness and efficiency, with ClaudeCode-Opus-4.7 improving chart correctness by around 5 points over Codex-GPT-5 while running roughly 20 seconds faster. Separately, we find that system design matters as much as the underlying model: despite both running on GPT-5, Codex clearly outperforms LIDA, showing that the surrounding prompting, execution, and refinement pipeline can shape outcomes as much as the model itself. Finally, latency remains a practical obstacle, as even the strongest systems take 39-78 seconds to produce results. VisCodeBench is available at \href{https://github.com/SAIPLL/VisCodeBench}{https://github.com/SAIPLL/VisCodeBench} and accessed via a leaderboard; the full dataset is kept private to prevent LLM training use.

尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要

Your Students Don’t Use LLMs Like You Wish They Did

Sebastian Kobler, Matthew Clemson, Angela Sun University of Sydney, University of Sydney, Jonathan K. Kummerfeld

Educational NLP systems are typically evaluated using engagement metrics and satisfaction surveys, which are at best a proxy for meeting pedagogical goals. We introduce six computational metrics for automated evaluation of pedagogical alignment in student-AI dialogue. We validate our metrics through analysis of 12,650 messages across 500 conversations from four courses. Using our metrics, we identify a fundamental misalignment: educators design conversational tutors for sustained learning dialogue, but students mainly use them for answer-extraction. Deployment context is the strongest predictor of usage patterns, outweighing student preference or system design: when AI tools are optional, usage concentrates around deadlines; when integrated into course structure, students ask for solutions to verbatim assignment questions. Whole-dialogue evaluation misses these turn-by-turn patterns. Our metrics will enable researchers building educational dialogue systems to measure whether they are achieving their pedagogical goals.

尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要

Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表