arXiv AI By Elias Schubert, Felix Bie{\ss}mann

Evaluating Structured Information Extraction with Open Models in a High Risk Public Sector Application

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper evaluates open-source OCR, LLM, and VLM systems on a high‑risk public sector task: extracting structured data from student application documents. Results show that VLMs generally outperform OCR+LLM pipelines, yet only 4 of 35 configurations achieve F1 scores above 0.5, with most combinations scoring below 0.25. Model size and input quality, especially preserving OCR structure, are critical factors influencing performance.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Sep 15

Beyond Accuracy: Robustness, Cost, and Governance Trade-offs for Vision-Language Models in Templated Document Extraction

The paper evaluates eleven vision‑language models (VLMs) for extracting structured fields from business documents, focusing on robustness, cost, and governance rather than just accuracy. Using a held‑out set of 750 synthetic checks, the study finds that fine‑tuning open‑source VLMs on 3,000 samples yields an F1 score above 0.98, surpassing all zero‑shot commercial systems, while GPT‑5 tops the commercial group and Claude Sonnet 4.5 fails on date extraction. The authors also present a practitioner‑oriented selection framework that maps task profiles—such as quality, latency, governance, and volume—to recommended approaches via filtering and total‑cost minimization, demonstrated on a mid‑volume document‑extraction scenario.

By Kushal Patel, Pushkal Shrivastava, Mackenzie Lees, Qirui Lu, Bhargobjyoti Saikia, Liying Li, Junlin Jiang
arXiv Computation and Language
6d ago

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 AI
Jul 21

DocOCR-Eval: A Correction-Based Framework for OCR Tool Selection Without Ground Truth

arXiv:2607. 16203v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Document parsing is a foundational step for document understanding tasks such as visual question answering and key information extraction, as it transforms unstructured scanned images into structured representations by extracting textual, visual, and layout information.

By Zihan Xu, Puzhen Wu, Lawrence Chun Man Lau, Wei Liu, Sirui Li, Yifan Peng, Yihao Ding
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 2

Closing Cost-Quality Gap in Document VLMs: Difficulty-Aware Data Curation and Quality-Adjusted Deployment Economics

arXiv:2609.01575v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Extracting structured fields from hundreds of millions of documents annually remains costly in regulated industries: bespoke OCR cascades cover only a...

By Maksim Evdokimov, Matvey Ivanov, Dmitrii Tsiupin, Olga Tsymboi, Anatolii Potapov, Aleksandr Ivanov