Yiming Xu
Publications
GVR-Coder: A Visual-Feedback Framework for Structured SVG Generation in Complex Document and Meeting Scenarios
In demanding professional environments and meeting review scenarios, lengthy text often imposes a high cognitive load. To facilitate efficient information communication, transforming verbose text into logically clear diagrams is essential. Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) provide an effective representation for this purpose due to their editability and resolution independence. However, current research on Text-to-SVG generation remains hindered by three major challenges: (1) the scarcity of datasets for complex, logic-rich diagrams; (2) the absence of explicit layout priors, which leads to chaotic spatial arrangements; and (3) the lack of fine-grained visual feedback to validate rendered outputs and correct aesthetic defects. To address these challenges, at the data level, we introduce DocMeetSVG-100K, a large-scale SVG dataset tailored for document authoring and meeting review scenarios. At the model level, we propose GVR-Coder, a novel framework designed to generate high-quality logical diagrams from lengthy professional texts. Specifically, we adopt a curriculum-driven rejection sampling fine-tuning to progressively enhance the model's capability in modeling complex structures, while explicitly incorporating layout constraint knowledge during training. In addition, we introduce reinforcement learning from dual rendering feedback, a mechanism that provides implicit feedback through reward signals to jointly optimize structural complexity and visual aesthetics. Furthermore, we design a generate-verify-repair agent loop, which improves generation quality through explicit, fine-grained feedback and targeted refinement. Extensive experiments demonstrate that GVR-Coder outperforms competitive baselines and reliably produces logically coherent and visually appealing diagrams. Code and data are available at https://github.com/CurryaNa/GVR-Coder.
Strategic Navigation or Stochastic Search? How Agents and Humans Reason Over Document Collections
Multimodal agents offer a promising path to automating complex document-intensive workflows. Yet, a critical question remains: do these agents demonstrate genuine strategic reasoning, or merely stochastic trial-and-error search? To address this, we introduce MADQA, a benchmark of 2,250 human-authored questions grounded in 800 heterogeneous PDF documents. Guided by Classical Test Theory, we design it to maximize discriminative power across varying levels of agentic abilities. To evaluate agentic behaviour, we introduce a novel evaluation protocol measuring the accuracy-effort trade-off. Using this framework, we show that while the best agents can match human searchers in raw accuracy, they succeed on largely different questions and rely on brute-force search to compensate for weak strategic planning. They fail to close the nearly 20% gap to oracle performance, persisting in unproductive loops. We release the dataset and evaluation harness to help facilitate the transition from brute-force retrieval to calibrated, efficient reasoning.