Sihyeon Lee

Soohyun Lee, Jaeyoung Kim, Seokhyeon Park et al.

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) show strong visualization interpretation, yet it is unclear whether their responses reflect genuine reasoning over visual evidence or factual priors learned during training. Current evaluations mix these two sources, obscuring when correct visual interpretation is overridden by memorized facts. We present a framework that isolates visual correctness from factual correctness, revealing validity limitations in existing visualization literacy assessments. Across three experiments with 15 state-of-the-art LVLMs: (1) several models reach human-level performance on standard tests (VLAT), but this may reflect factual recall rather than visual understanding, while randomized-data tests (reVLAT) underestimate literacy when correct visual interpretation is superseded by factual priors. (2) Using our Counterfactual Visualization Literacy Assessment Test (CVLAT) with capability-normalized arbitration metrics, we classify models by the sign of their visual-factual reliance index (VFRI), revealing a visualization-oriented majority and a factual knowledge-oriented minority, though several near-zero cases warrant caution. A human baseline (N=30) on the same counterfactual items confirms that people overwhelmingly follow the chart under conflict, providing a human reference point. (3) Prompt-based intervention can shift prioritization, but its effectiveness is highly model-dependent and direction-asymmetric, and high chart-reading capability does not predict prompt-controllability. Overall, high visualization accuracy is not sufficient evidence of faithful visual reasoning: reliable integration into visual analytics requires evaluating not only visualization literacy but also how models arbitrate between visual evidence and factual priors when the two diverge. Benchmark and code: https://github.com/JaeyoungKim-HCIL/CVLAT

Jaeyoung Kim, Sihyeon Lee, Hyeon Jeon et al.

Acute stroke demands prompt diagnosis and treatment to achieve optimal patient outcomes. However, the intricate and irregular nature of clinical data associated with acute stroke, particularly blood pressure (BP) measurements, presents substantial obstacles to effective visual analytics and decision-making. Through a year-long collaboration with experienced neurologists, we developed PhenoFlow, a visual analytics system that leverages the collaboration between human and Large Language Models (LLMs) to analyze the extensive and complex data of acute ischemic stroke patients. PhenoFlow pioneers an innovative workflow, where the LLM serves as a data wrangler while neurologists explore and supervise the output using visualizations and natural language interactions. This approach enables neurologists to focus more on decision-making with reduced cognitive load. To protect sensitive patient information, PhenoFlow only utilizes metadata to make inferences and synthesize executable codes, without accessing raw patient data. This ensures that the results are both reproducible and interpretable while maintaining patient privacy. The system incorporates a slice-and-wrap design that employs temporal folding to create an overlaid circular visualization. Combined with a linear bar graph, this design aids in exploring meaningful patterns within irregularly measured BP data. Through case studies, PhenoFlow has demonstrated its capability to support iterative analysis of extensive clinical datasets, reducing cognitive load and enabling neurologists to make well-informed decisions. Grounded in long-term collaboration with domain experts, our research demonstrates the potential of utilizing LLMs to tackle current challenges in data-driven clinical decision-making for acute ischemic stroke patients.

Sihyeon Lee, Hyunjoo Song, Jong-chan Lee et al.

Deploying large language models (LLMs) in clinical settings faces critical trade-offs: cloud LLMs, with their extensive parameters and superior performance, pose risks to sensitive clinical data privacy, while local LLMs preserve privacy but often fail at complex clinical interpretation tasks. We propose MedOrchestra, a hybrid framework where a cloud LLM decomposes complex clinical tasks into manageable subtasks and prompt generation, while a local LLM executes these subtasks in a privacy-preserving manner. Without accessing clinical data, the cloud LLM generates and validates subtask prompts using clinical guidelines and synthetic test cases. The local LLM executes subtasks locally and synthesizes outputs generated by the cloud LLM. We evaluate MedOrchestra on pancreatic cancer staging using 100 radiology reports under NCCN guidelines. On free-text reports, MedOrchestra achieves 70.21% accuracy, outperforming local model baselines (without guideline: 48.94%, with guideline: 56.59%) and board-certified clinicians (gastroenterologists: 59.57%, surgeons: 65.96%, radiologists: 55.32%). On structured reports, MedOrchestra reaches 85.42% accuracy, showing clear superiority across all settings.