Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Alexander Bendeck

dblp:273/6885 · also Alexander E. Bendeck · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
3as first author
4since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0002-9799-2194ORCID · verified

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Data integration and cleaning · 70% Query processing and optimization · 21% Machine learning and data management · 10%
Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Visualization and visual analytics · 100%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Visualization and visual analytics › visualization literacy › visualization interpretation › chart understanding
chart question answering
0.912025
An Empirical Evaluation of the GPT-4 Multimodal Language Model on Visualization Literacy Tasks · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2025
Visualization and visual analytics
visualization literacy
0.912025
An Empirical Evaluation of the GPT-4 Multimodal Language Model on Visualization Literacy Tasks · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2025
Data integration and cleaning
entity matching
0.712023
Ground Truth Inference for Weakly Supervised Entity Matching · Proc. ACM Manag. Data 2023
Data integration and cleaning
truth discovery
0.712023
Ground Truth Inference for Weakly Supervised Entity Matching · Proc. ACM Manag. Data 2023
Query processing and optimization
query debugging
0.412020
I-Rex: An Interactive Relational Query Explainer for SQL · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020
Machine learning and data management
data annotation
0.212023
Ground Truth Inference for Weakly Supervised Entity Matching · Proc. ACM Manag. Data 2023
Data integration and cleaning
data provenance
0.112020
I-Rex: An Interactive Relational Query Explainer for SQL · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

multimodal large language model evaluation · 0.9weak supervision · 0.7transitivity constraint · 0.7labeling functions · 0.7deep learning · 0.7provenance · 0.4counterexample generation · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2026 DataForager: Integrating and Visualizing Datasets From the Web Using Large Language Models
Alexander Bendeck, Harry Li, Steven R. Gomez, Ashley Suh 0001
AVI1
2025 An Empirical Evaluation of the GPT-4 Multimodal Language Model on Visualization Literacy Tasks
abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4 which support multimodal input (i.e., prompts containing images in addition to text) have immense potential to advance visualization research. However, many questions exist about the visual capabilities of such models, including how well they can read and interpret visually represented data. In our work, we address this question by evaluating the GPT-4 multimodal LLM using a suite of task sets meant to assess the model's visualization literacy. The task sets are based on existing work in the visualization community addressing both automated chart question answering and human visualization literacy across multiple settings. Our assessment finds that GPT-4 can perform tasks such as recognizing trends and extreme values, and also demonstrates some understanding of visualization design best-practices. By contrast, GPT-4 struggles with simple value retrieval when not provided with the original dataset, lacks the ability to reliably distinguish between colors in charts, and occasionally suffers from hallucination and inconsistency. We conclude by reflecting on the model's strengths and weaknesses as well as the potential utility of models like GPT-4 for future visualization research. We also release all code, stimuli, and results for the task sets at the following link: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/F39J6.
Alexander Bendeck, John T. Stasko
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.1
2024 SlopeSeeker: A Search Tool for Exploring a Dataset of Quantifiable Trends
abstract
Natural language and search interfaces intuitively facilitate data exploration and provide visualization responses to diverse analytical queries based on the underlying datasets. However, these interfaces often fail to interpret more complex analytical intents, such as discerning subtleties and quantifiable differences between terms like “bump’’ and “spike’’ in the context of COVID cases, for example. We address this gap by extending the capabilities of a data exploration search interface for interpreting semantic concepts in time series trends. We first create a comprehensive dataset of semantic concepts by mapping quantifiable univariate data trends such as slope and angle to crowdsourced, semantically meaningful trend labels. The dataset contains quantifiable properties that capture the slope-scalar effect of semantic modifiers like “sharply” and “gradually,” as well as multi-line trends (e.g., “peak,” “valley”). We demonstrate the utility of this dataset in SlopeSeeker, a tool that supports natural language querying of quantifiable trends, such as “show me stocks that tanked in 2010.” The tool incorporates novel scoring and ranking techniques based on semantic relevance and visual prominence to present relevant trend chart responses containing these semantic trend concepts. In addition, SlopeSeeker provides a faceted search interface for users to navigate a semantic hierarchy of concepts from general trends (e.g., “increase’’) to more specific ones (e.g., “sharp increase’’). A preliminary user evaluation of the tool demonstrates that the search interface supports greater expressivity of queries containing concepts that describe data trends. We identify potential future directions for leveraging our publicly available quantitative semantics dataset in other data domains and for novel visual analytics interfaces.
Alexander Bendeck, Dennis Bromley, Vidya Setlur
IUI1
2023 Ground Truth Inference for Weakly Supervised Entity Matching
abstract
Entity matching (EM) refers to the problem of identifying pairs of data records in one or more relational tables that refer to the same entity in the real world. Supervised machine learning (ML) models currently achieve state-of-the-art matching performance; however, they require a large number of labeled examples, which are often expensive or infeasible to obtain. This has inspired us to approach data labeling for EM using weak supervision. In particular, we use the labeling function abstraction popularized by Snorkel, where each labeling function (LF) is a user-provided program that can generate many noisy match/non-match labels quickly and cheaply. Given a set of user-written LFs, the quality of data labeling depends on a labeling model to accurately infer the ground-truth labels. In this work, we first propose a simple but powerful labeling model for general weak supervision tasks. Then, we tailor the labeling model specifically to the task of entity matching by considering the EM-specific transitivity property. The general form of our labeling model is simple while substantially outperforming the best existing method across ten general weak supervision datasets. To tailor the labeling model for EM, we formulate an approach to ensure that the final predictions of the labeling model satisfy the transitivity property required in EM, utilizing an exact solution where possible and an ML-based approximation in remaining cases. On two single-table and nine two-table real-world EM datasets, we show that our labeling model results in a 9% higher F1 score on average than the best existing method. We also show that a deep learning EM end model (DeepMatcher) trained on labels generated from our weak supervision approach is comparable to an end model trained using tens of thousands of ground-truth labels, demonstrating that our approach can significantly reduce the labeling efforts required in EM.
Renzhi Wu, Alexander Bendeck, Xu Chu 0002, Yeye He
Proc. ACM Manag. Data2
2020 I-Rex: An Interactive Relational Query Explainer for SQL
abstract
We demonstrate I-Rex 1 , a system designed to help users understand SQL query evaluation and debug SQL queries. I-Rex lets users interactively "trace" the evaluation of complex SQL queries, including those with correlated subqueries. I-Rex also explains why a query returns an incorrect answer with respect to a reference query over a test database instance---a common use case in education and software regression testing. To avoid the cognitive overload caused by debugging over a large database instance, I-Rex lets users focus on smaller instances contained in the large one (which we call "counterexamples") that still distinguish the two queries. Supporting these features for SQL queries poses two key challenges. First, unlike debugging for procedural languages, it is not clear how to trace a declarative SQL query, because its execution plan often differs from how it was originally written. I-Rex offers a novel interface for tracing SQL query evaluation in a way faithful to how queries are written syntactically, even for complex queries involving multiple levels of nesting and correlation. Second, we need a method for finding small counterexamples that handles the complexity of practical SQL. I-Rex extends provenance support for SQL in non-trivial ways to work with various query constructs. This demonstration walks through use cases in which I-Rex helps users understand and debug SQL queries.
Zhengjie Miao, Tiangang Chen, Alexander Bendeck, Kevin Day, Sudeepa Roy 0001, Jun Yang 0001
Proc. VLDB Endow.3