arXiv Computation and Language

Data Quality in RVL-CDIP: A Systematic Audit

The paper audits the RVL-CDIP document classification benchmark, uncovering that about 10.5% of its 400,000 documents have incorrect labels and that 35.2% of the test set contains duplicates or near-duplicates in the training set. It shows that identification codes on pages enable 69% classification accuracy, and removing them drops performance by 11 points; OCR engine choice can shift accuracy by 4.1 to 8.3 points. After correcting defects, 13 re‑trained models improve by 0.9 to 2.9 points, with LayoutLMv3 achieving 96.5% accuracy, and the authors release a cleaned corpus, annotations, and out‑of‑distribution data.

arXiv AI
Sep 10

AtomCite: Verification and Correction of Supplied Page-Level Citations in Multi-Page Documents

AtomCite is an agentic framework that verifies and corrects page‑level citations in multi‑page documents by parsing answers into claims, checking each claim against the cited page image, and applying a deterministic repair policy. The authors introduce DocCite, the first benchmark for this task, built on MP‑DocVQA and DUDE, containing 928 injected instances and 1,909 verified natural errors. Across Gemini, Claude, and GPT models, AtomCite achieves about 93% verification accuracy and improves citation precision from 34% to 87‑90%, while also enhancing hallucination detection in open‑source models.

By Chen Qian, Yimeng Wang, Yu Chen, Lingfei Wu, Andreas Stathopoulos
arXiv AI
Oct 27

Entity-Aware Evaluation of OCR Systems for Historical Document Transcription

The paper introduces an entity‑aware evaluation framework for OCR systems applied to historical documents, focusing on how well names, dates, and identifiers are preserved. Using a benchmark of 175 Berrutti Archive documents and 5,209 manually annotated entity mentions, the authors compare sequence‑recognition OCR, OCR‑specialized vision‑language models, and general‑purpose vision‑language models. Their results show that OCR rankings vary with the evaluation criterion: Qwen 3.6 achieves the highest entity coverage, while some systems recover many entities when small character‑level errors are tolerated, indicating that aggregate transcription metrics alone do not capture meaningful information preservation.

By Camilo Mari\~no (UDELAR, CB), Diego Belzarena (UDELAR, CB), Marina Gardella (CB), Ignacio Ram\'irez (UDELAR), Gregory Randall (UDELAR), Jean-Michel Morel (LU - Hong Kong)
arXiv Computer Vision
Oct 27

DOCFORGE-BENCH: A Comprehensive 0-shot Benchmark for Document Forgery Detection and Analysis

arXiv:2603.01433v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We present DOCFORGE-BENCH, the first unified zero-shot benchmark for document forgery detection, evaluating 14 methods across eight datasets spanni...

By Zengqi Zhao, Weidi Xia, En Wei, Yan Zhang, Jane Mo, Tiannan Zhang, Yuanqin Dai, Zexi Chen, Yiran Tao, Simiao Ren
arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 12

Measuring Artifact Reliance in Machine-Generated Text Detectors

The study evaluates machine‑generated text detectors on scientific literature, finding that many detectors perform near perfectly on certain benchmarks due to superficial formatting cues rather than genuine linguistic differences. A logistic regression using 27 superficial features achieved macro‑F1 scores between 0.833 and 0.997, outperforming other detectors on arXiv subsets. The most powerful cue was the PDF extraction artifact—human texts preserve line breaks while generated texts appear as a single block—allowing classification at 0.996 AUC. By introducing format counterfactuals and normalizing formatting, the authors demonstrate that re‑wrapping machine‑written abstracts can flip 20–27% of detector decisions, reducing the generalization gap and improving out‑of‑domain performance.

By Anastasia Voznyuk, Andrey Grabovoy
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 30

From Pixels to Pairs: A Comprehensive Benchmark of LLM-Driven Key-Value Extraction in Noisy Document Settings

The paper introduces a controlled benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) on key‑value pair extraction from documents with varying levels of OCR noise. It tests 136 configurations across five instruction‑tuned open‑weight LLMs, three datasets, and four text‑quality conditions, using deterministic decoding to generate 17,688 document‑level inferences. The study finds that clean‑text performance does not reliably predict real‑world robustness, model rankings can reverse under noisy conditions, and few‑shot demonstrations do not always improve accuracy, highlighting reliability risks in OCR‑to‑LLM pipelines.

By Zahra Anvari
arXiv Computation and Language
Aug 27

RefLAM: A Reference-Grounded Line Annotation Pipeline for Historical Arabic Manuscripts

RefLAM is a pipeline that converts manuscript page images and clean transcriptions into validated, line-level ground truth for Arabic handwritten text recognition. It combines a deep‑learning page‑segmentation model, a multimodal large language model for structured OCR, and a diacritic‑agnostic fuzzy alignment engine that assigns a confidence score to each line, with a provable correctness guarantee for perfect scores. Using RefLAM, the authors achieved a 75× speedup over manual annotation and released AraMS‑28k, a dataset of 14 historical Arabic manuscripts with detailed annotations.

By Mohamed Guechaoui, Mohamed Diaa Zellagui, Souleyman Chaib, Sahraoui Dhelim
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 17

From Pixels to Pairs: A Comprehensive Benchmark of LLM-Based Key-Value Extraction in Noisy Document Settings

The paper introduces a benchmark for evaluating open‑source instruction‑tuned large language models (LLMs) on key‑value pair extraction from documents under both clean‑text and noisy OCR conditions. It tests decoder‑only models such as Gemma, Mistral, Qwen2.5, LLaMA 3, and DeepSeek on FUNSD, CORD, and SROIE datasets, using OCR outputs from PaddleOCR, EasyOCR, and Tesseract. Results show that while modern LLMs perform well on high‑quality text, their performance drops sharply with OCR noise, and the main determinants of success are semantic reasoning and textual fidelity, with larger models offering diminishing returns under noisy inputs.

By Zahra Anvari, Vassilis Athitsos