SlideAudit: A Dataset and Taxonomy for Automated Evaluation of Presentation Slides

Automated evaluation of specific graphic designs like presentation slides is an open problem. We present SlideAudit, a dataset for automated slide evaluation. We collaborated with design experts to develop a thorough taxonomy of slide design flaws. Our dataset comprises 2400 slides collected and synthesized from multiple sources, including a subset intentionally modified with specific design problems. We then fully annotated them using our taxonomy through strictly trained crowdsourcing from Prolific. To evaluate whether AI is capable of identifying design flaws, we compared multiple large language models under different prompting strategies, and with an existing design critique pipeline. We show that AI models struggle to accurately identify slide design flaws, with F1 scores ranging from 0.331 to 0.655. Notably, prompting techniques leveraging our taxonomy achieved the highest performance. We further conducted a remediation study to assess AI's potential for improving slides. Among 82.0% of slides that showed significant improvement, 87.8% of them were improved more with our taxonomy, further demonstrating its utility.

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-09-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3746059.3747736
Primary Topic
Plant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

SlideAudit: A Dataset and Taxonomy for Automated Evaluation of Presentation Slides

Plant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
article

SlideAudit: A Dataset and Taxonomy for Automated Evaluation of Presentation Slides

article en

Abstract

Automated evaluation of specific graphic designs like presentation slides is an open problem. We present SlideAudit, a dataset for automated slide evaluation. We collaborated with design experts to develop a thorough taxonomy of slide design flaws. Our dataset comprises 2400 slides collected and synthesized from multiple sources, including a subset intentionally modified with specific design problems. We then fully annotated them using our taxonomy through strictly trained crowdsourcing from Prolific. To evaluate whether AI is capable of identifying design flaws, we compared multiple large language models under different prompting strategies, and with an existing design critique pipeline. We show that AI models struggle to accurately identify slide design flaws, with F1 scores ranging from 0.331 to 0.655. Notably, prompting techniques leveraging our taxonomy achieved the highest performance. We further conducted a remediation study to assess AI's potential for improving slides. Among 82.0% of slides that showed significant improvement, 87.8% of them were improved more with our taxonomy, further demonstrating its utility.

University of Washington (US)
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, University of Washington, Australian Government, Administration for Community Living, National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research
Openalex Percentile: Top 41%
Plant pathogens and resistance mechanisms
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.