One model passed our fidelity check without ever opening the datasheet. We found it while qualifying models for an internal extraction service: a structured-output constraint had silently disabled tool use, and the model answered anyway, with fabricated source text. Only the per-tool trace exposed it. Fidelity -- whether an extracted value matches the source -- is the standard measure for agentic document extraction, and it scores that run a success. We therefore log every tool call in an agentic benchmark of 25 hand-curated claims over three components, with 12 more on a fourth, 37 in all. From that dispatch record we build two instruments: a rule-based failure-attribution classifier, and a silent-failure detector whose two rules check only which tools were called, never the extracted value. The detector raises no flag on 207 clean fidelity-passing extractions across three model families, and recovers all 50 planted faults that withhold exactly the tools its rules check. The two results are not symmetric: the first bounds the false-positive rate, the second is recall by construction, and detection power against runs that call their tools and still answer wrongly is unmeasured. A second, independent oracle, a causal chamber that tests whether the datasheet's claims hold under physical measurement, is intentionally partial: it confirms only what the apparatus can exercise, a verifiable envelope of 2 of those 37 claims, and we give a taxonomy of why the rest are not physically gradable. Under a controlled perturbation, fidelity passes throughout while the chamber verdict flips exactly at the measurement uncertainty. Across three deployed model stacks (one destabilised by its serving stack, not by any capability gap) the tool layer buys portability and observability rather than accuracy, and earns its premium only once a document outgrows the context window.
Enterprise guideline documents are heterogeneous and multimodal, combining narrative text, complex tables, and embedded images. Existing LLM and VLM systems face hallucinated content, table structure degradation, and lack governed workflows extending beyond extraction to validation and artifact generation. This leaves enterprises to perform this manually, consuming 2-3 days per document. To address this, we introduce GUIDE, a governed multi-agent framework built on a shared versioned rule store with schema-validated inter-agent contracts and end-to-end provenance tracking. Six specialized agents handle parsing, VLM-driven extraction, consistency checking, evaluation, human-in-the-loop (HITL) escalation, and persona-tailored artifact synthesis. Evaluated on 120 real-world enterprise guideline documents, GUIDE achieves 96% document success, extracts 3,896 rules with 71.4% auto-approved, produces 812 deployment-ready artifacts, and reduces turnaround to 40-125 minutes per document.
Most document-extraction systems use a single model for all documents. This is simple but can be costly for easy cases and less effective for difficult ones. We examine whether we can predict a document's difficulty before extraction using inexpensive, document-based signals, and use this to choose between a cheaper and a stronger extractor. We find that routing only helps if two conditions hold: the cheaper model fails often enough to make routing worthwhile, and those failures can be predicted from visible features such as image quality and layout. We turn these into a practical test and apply it to five genres. When both conditions are met, the calibrated router reduces cost by 31-33% on receipts and 77% on degraded ad-buy forms while keeping quality within 0.02 F1 of always choosing the large model. Routing does not help if either condition is missing, as with clean digital invoices or nutrition labels that are already easy to read. A small labeled pilot can predict whether routing will work, and in the two cases where we ran it first, the prediction was correct. A simple bag-of-words router works about as well as engineered features, showing that the main limit is the genre, not the router design; we use interpretable features to help explain which genres can be routed. The router must be retrained for each dataset and does not transfer across datasets, even within the same genre. These results hold for two model pairs with cost differences of 5x and 3x.
Priyashree Roy, Sujitha Martin, Mohammad Rostami +6cs.AI cs.CL
Intelligent document processing (IDP) with vision-language models (VLMs) hinges on confidence scores trustworthy enough to route extractions between automation and human review. Existing document benchmarks are dominated by clean, high-quality samples, leaving low accuracy regions too sparse for calibration assessment. We introduce ConfBench, the first calibration-specific benchmark for key information extraction (KIE), built by applying 20 controlled degradation pipelines to a diverse document set, yielding 1,346 variants and 70K+ entity-level evaluations spanning the full accuracy spectrum. We evaluate four proprietary and three open-weight VLMs under verbalized and log-probability confidence estimation methods across three input modalities, and find: (i) OCR+Image modality results in more accurate confidence estimates; (ii) model capability is the dominant factor: within the Claude family confidence quality scales monotonically with capability, while across families parameter count is a poor predictor; (iii) calibration quality varies widely across models, from near-perfect to severely overconfident, and per-model post-hoc correction rescales these absolute confidence values for threshold-based routing without altering ranking-based operational metrics; and (iv) log-probability with first-token aggregation consistently outperforms mean-token and margin aggregations. We also introduce ECARB, a review-budget metric translating discriminative gains into operational savings. We release ConfBench publicly to enable systematic study of confidence estimators and calibration methods for trustworthy IDP application deployment.
Enterprise workflows increasingly rely on agents for \emph{schema-guided extraction}: given a document and a user-defined schema, the agent faithfully follows the schema to produce the correct output with source evidence as grounding metadata. We present ExtractBench, a benchmark for schema-guided extraction and, to our knowledge, the first to score value accuracy, record completeness at scale, grounding, and measured cost together. The evaluation system contains 4,869 pages across 370 enterprise documents, 8 business domains, and 67 document types, with clear tags differentiating their challenge scenarios. The scalable schema and ground-truth curation pipeline combines independent-system agreement for real documents, known values for synthetic lists, and human verification for forms. We report order-insensitive value F1 for value accuracy, plus two grounding metrics for source traceability: word- and page-level F1. Commercial VLMs perform well on short documents but often truncate record lists on long ones, while coding agents retain higher accuracy at much higher cost. LlamaExtract Agentic Plus ranks first on all three metrics, with accuracy comparable to coding agents at a fraction of the cost. Dataset and evaluation code are available on \href{https://huggingface.co/datasets/llamaindex/ExtractBench}{HuggingFace} and \href{https://github.com/run-llama/ExtractBench}{GitHub}.
Per-field accept/review with selective risk at most alpha -- accept a field only if the error rate among accepted fields is controlled -- is the trust contract document-extraction systems need, and the natural procedure silently violates it on real documents. On 13,859 genuine claude-sonnet-5 fields from 800 CORD receipts (49.0% correct) we diagnose three failure modes: document clustering (design effect 1.84-2.45), score-refit leakage (coverage 0.416 at risk 0.127, violating alpha=0.10 in 95% of splits), and a tie-mass pathology (a degenerate score collapses the threshold grid, 0.030 to 0.001). We organize the fixes as a validity ladder, guarantee form stated per tier. A fit/val split protocol restores expected-selective-risk control for a learned fusion: coverage 0.318 at risk 0.096 at nominal alpha=0.10, no tolerance band (production variant 0.326) -- an on-average point whose realized risk exceeds alpha in 47.5% of resplits, not a certificate. Mondrian Learn-then-Test with exact binomial tails yields per-group PAC certificates: field-iid 0.171 at risk 0.068, cluster-corrected 0.140, doc-iid 0.060 -- the only tier matching documents, honestly near-vacuous today. Support-bin, the pre-specified provenance taxonomy, wins every rigor tier on the sonnet CORD capture (p<1e-4, Bonferroni-corrected) -- a win that does not replicate on the same documents under haiku or qwen -- while on higher-accuracy corpora pooled thresholds win: conditioning helps exactly where pooled cannot certify, subsumed by a learned score elsewhere. A frozen-configuration confirmation on selection-untouched claude-haiku-4-5 held at both risk levels, and a blind three-annotator human-gold audit verifies the practical tier's accepted-set risk at 1.3% against its 10% budget (Fleiss' kappa=0.83; labels err one-sidedly pessimistic). Released Apache-2.0 with seed-pinned, regression-gated procedures.
Muhammad Assad Shehbaz, Carlos Francisco Moreno-Garcíacs.CV
Real estate property listings expose structured metadata through the API. Still, the richest property-level information (i.e., legal status, structural condition, utility supplies, heating systems) sits in attached questionnaire documents that no automated system currently processes at scale. These documents are heterogeneous. Some are digitally generated with selectable text, others are scanned physical forms. There are even more complex layouts that contain checkbox annotations that defeat conventional text extraction. In this paper, we present an end-to-end pipeline for acquiring, classifying, and extracting structured data from selectable text documents. The pipeline was applied to 3965 questionnaire documents collected from a live property platform via reverse-engineered REST APIs. First, we classified each document into one of three structural categories (text_only, scanned, and special_char), then extracted 35 predefined property attributes from eligible documents using DeepSeek R1 as the Large Language Model, prompted to return a structured JSON object. All 2781 submitted documents were processed successfully, producing a final dataset of 2766 unique property records. Downstream validation confirmed the data quality. Cosine similarity matching achieves a Jaccard consistency score of 0.82, and K-Means clustering produces interpretable market segments with a silhouette score of 0.2088. Results show that the proposed extraction from each property document is both feasible and reliable at this scale.
In high-stakes document processing pipelines, including financial reconciliation, compliance verification, and procurement automation, an LLM extraction that is silently wrong is more dangerous than one that is visibly absent. The central challenge is not extraction accuracy alone but reliable confidence estimation: knowing, field by field, whether an extraction can be trusted for automation or deferred to human review. Token-level log-probabilities, verbalized confidence, and multi-sample self-consistency all collapse toward all-positive behaviour at practical thresholds, offering no reliable separation between trustworthy and untrustworthy extractions. We present ExtractConf, a cross-domain, field-agnostic confidence engine that grounds confidence estimation in two structurally different readings of the same document. A field-guided Hunter call extracts each field under schema-slot completion pressure; a document-guided Mapper call scans holistically and surfaces values grounded in document content. This asymmetry yields different failure modes: Hunter hallucinates values for absent fields, while Mapper misses visually non-salient ones. Their disagreement is independently informative. ExtractConf fuses cross-call disagreement, LLM-internal uncertainty, OCR, image quality, and spatial layout into a classifier requiring no domain-specific rules or retraining. On DocILE (55-field invoices, 26% failure rate), it achieves 0.928 ROC AUC and reduces selective prediction risk by 70% over logprob-mean. At 80% coverage, accuracy reaches 99.1%, enabling a practical human-in-the-loop workflow. Zero-shot transfer to CORD receipts achieves 0.858 AUC; lightweight Lasso recalibration reduces ECE by 89% and Brier by 43%, confirming the signals generalise across document domains.
Structured information extraction from long, multilingual scanned financial documents is a core requirement in industrial KYC and compliance workflows. These documents are typically non machine readable, noisy, and visually heterogeneous. They usually span dozens of pages while containing only sparse task relevant information. Although recent vision-language models achieve strong benchmark performance, directly applying them end to end to full financial reports often leads to unreliable extraction under real world conditions. We present a multistage extraction framework that integrates image preprocessing, multilingual OCR, hybrid page-level retrieval, and compact VLM-based structured extraction. The design separates page localization from multimodal reasoning, enabling more accurate extraction from complex multipage documents. We evaluated the framework on 120 production KYC documents comprising about 3000 multilingual scanned pages. Across multiple OCR-VLM combinations, the proposed pipeline consistently outperforms direct PDF-to-VLM baselines, improving field-level accuracy by up to 31.9 percentage points. The best configuration, PaddleOCR with MiniCPM2.6, achieves 87.27 percent accuracy. Ablation studies show that page-level retrieval is the dominant factor in performance improvements, particularly for complex financial statements and non-English documents.