K-文化的一切——从回归到 K-美妆,发送到您的邮箱订阅邮件

METAL MEDIA

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

arXiv:2608.182892026-08-20

在高风险公共部门文档任务中,开源AI开箱即用有四分之三不合格

研究人员用德国一个数据科学硕士项目收到的100份真实成绩单构建了一个基准测试,评估了35种开源OCR引擎、大语言模型(LLM)与视觉语言模型(VLM)组合在抽取课程名称、成绩和学分这类结构化信息上的表现。结果显示,35种配置中只有4种F1分数超过0.5,约75%的配置得分低于0.25,基本属于失败水平。这说明这类系统在欧盟人工智能法案归类为高风险的公共部门场景中,不能不加调整就直接投入使用。

METAL MEDIA 解读图

在高风险公共部门文档任务中,开源AI开箱即用有四分之三不合格

  1. 01研究团队用100份真实、格式混乱的PDF成绩单(表格、自由文本、机构印章混杂)手工标注了标准答案,以代表欧盟AI法案视为高风险的公共行政文档处理任务。
  2. 02他们在完全不做针对性微调的零样本(zero-shot)设定下,比较了两条流程:一是OCR引擎(Pytesseract、PaddleOCR、MinerU、EasyOCR、docTR)搭配参数量从0.6B到235B不等的Qwen3语言模型;二是直接读取文档图像的视觉语言模型(LLaVA、Ministral-3、Gemma3、Qwen2.5VL、Qwen3VL)。
  3. 03表现最好的OCR+LLM组合是MinerU搭配Qwen3:235B,F1为0.509,与表现最好的VLM Qwen2.5-VL(同为0.509)打平,而LLaVA和Gemma3的得分几乎为零。MinerU的优势在于保留了页面的空间排版,并用HTML标签编码表格结构,而不是把文字逐块拆散。
  4. 04模型越大并不代表表现越好,Qwen2.5-VL甚至优于其后续版本Qwen3-VL,而极小的0.6B版Qwen3常常陷入重复输出的死循环。如果去掉成绩和学分列、只抽取课程名称,分数会明显提升,说明各种不一致的成绩表示方式是主要的出错来源。
这是 METAL MEDIA 制作的解读图,并非论文作者提供的原图。

他们做了什么

  1. 研究团队用100份真实、格式混乱的PDF成绩单(表格、自由文本、机构印章混杂)手工标注了标准答案,以代表欧盟AI法案视为高风险的公共行政文档处理任务。
  2. 他们在完全不做针对性微调的零样本(zero-shot)设定下,比较了两条流程:一是OCR引擎(Pytesseract、PaddleOCR、MinerU、EasyOCR、docTR)搭配参数量从0.6B到235B不等的Qwen3语言模型;二是直接读取文档图像的视觉语言模型(LLaVA、Ministral-3、Gemma3、Qwen2.5VL、Qwen3VL)。
  3. 表现最好的OCR+LLM组合是MinerU搭配Qwen3:235B,F1为0.509,与表现最好的VLM Qwen2.5-VL(同为0.509)打平,而LLaVA和Gemma3的得分几乎为零。MinerU的优势在于保留了页面的空间排版,并用HTML标签编码表格结构,而不是把文字逐块拆散。
  4. 模型越大并不代表表现越好,Qwen2.5-VL甚至优于其后续版本Qwen3-VL,而极小的0.6B版Qwen3常常陷入重复输出的死循环。如果去掉成绩和学分列、只抽取课程名称,分数会明显提升,说明各种不一致的成绩表示方式是主要的出错来源。
Figure 1: Anonymized example document.
Figure 1: Anonymized example document.
Table 1: Manually extracted Ground Truth for the Document in Figure 1
Academic FieldCourse NameGradeAwarded Credits
MathematicsMATHEMATICS FOR COMPUTER THEORY ENGINEERING & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGYB4.00
Computer ScienceOPERATING SYSTEMSB3.00
Computer ScienceDESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF ALGORITHMSC3.00
Computer ScienceAPPLICATION DEVELOPMENT TOOLSB2.00
Computer SciencePROGRAMMING FOR SCIENTIFIC THEORY COMPUTINGB+3.00
Computer ScienceNO SQL DATABASE SYSTEMSB+1.00
Figure 2: Workflow of extraction and evaluation pipeline
Figure 2: Workflow of extraction and evaluation pipeline
Table 2: OCR model configurations and output formats.
ModelInputLanguage ConfigOutput Format
docTRPDFauto-detectUnstructured; line breaks between text blocks
EasyOCRImage (JPG)EnglishUnstructured; tabs between text blocks (manually added)
MinerUPDFEnglishStructured; HTML tags for tables, line breaks between text rows
PPOCRv5Image (JPG)EnglishUnstructured; tabs between text blocks (manually added)
PPStructureV3PDFEnglishStructured; HTML tags for tables, line breaks between text blocks
PytesseractImage (JPG)EnglishStructured; line breaks between text rows
Figure 4: Best F1 score per model: top OCR+LLM combination (always Qwen3:235B) versus all VLMs.
Figure 4: Best F1 score per model: top OCR+LLM combination (always Qwen3:235B) versus all VLMs.
Table 3: OCR model architecture components (specified models only).
ModelOrient. Class.Doc UnwarpingText DetectionTextline Orient.Text Recognition
docTRdb_resnet50master
EasyOCR
MinerU
PPOCRv5PP-LCNet_x1_0_doc_oriUVDocOCRv5_server_detPP-LCNet_x1_0_textline_oriPP-OCRv5_server_rec
PPStructureV3PP-LCNet_x1_0_doc_oriUVDocOCRv5_server_detPP-LCNet_x1_0_textline_oriPP-OCRv5_server_rec
Pytesseract
Figure 5: F1 scores across Qwen3 parameter sizes for each OCR engine.
Figure 5: F1 scores across Qwen3 parameter sizes for each OCR engine.
Table 4: Qwen3 model architecture parameters [31]. Context lengths as specified in Ollama [23]. Q/KV heads refer to query and key-value attention heads [29].
ModelParametersContext LengthLayersHeads (Q / KV)
Qwen30.6B40K2816 / 8
Qwen34B256K3632 / 8
Qwen314B40K4040 / 8
Qwen332B40K6464 / 8
Qwen3235B256K9464 / 4
Figure 6: F1 improvement when removing grade, awarded credits, or both.
Figure 6: F1 improvement when removing grade, awarded credits, or both.
Table 5: Vision-language model overview.
ModelYearArchitectureParametersContextVision Encoder
Gemma 32025Decoder-only27B128KSigLIP
LLaVA2024Encoder-decoder7B32KCLIP
Ministral 32025Decoder-only14B256KViT
Qwen2.5-VL2025Encoder-decoder32B125KViT
Qwen3-VL2025Encoder-decoder32B256KSigLIP-2
Table 6: Extraction performance metrics for OCR+LLM pipeline and VLM models.
OCR EngineLLM ModelPrecisionRecallF1
OCR + LLM Pipeline
docTRQwen3 0.6B0.0140.0220.016
docTRQwen3 4B0.1990.2170.201
docTRQwen3 14B0.2020.2380.215
docTRQwen3 32B0.2040.2220.209
docTRQwen3 235B0.3010.3290.311
EasyOCRQwen3 0.6B0.0070.0090.008
EasyOCRQwen3 4B0.0790.0880.080
EasyOCRQwen3 14B0.0790.1110.088
EasyOCRQwen3 32B0.1030.1250.108
EasyOCRQwen3 235B0.1040.1260.112
MinerUQwen3 0.6B0.0780.0810.075
MinerUQwen3 4B0.4150.4720.427
MinerUQwen3 14B0.4550.4990.465
MinerUQwen3 32B0.4710.5510.501
MinerUQwen3 235B0.4890.5420.509
PPOCRv5Qwen3 0.6B0.0020.0020.002
PPOCRv5Qwen3 4B0.1600.1990.170
PPOCRv5Qwen3 14B0.2070.2620.222
PPOCRv5Qwen3 32B0.1630.1840.169
PPOCRv5Qwen3 235B0.3120.3450.324
PPStructureV3Qwen3 0.6B0.0220.0200.020
PPStructureV3Qwen3 4B0.1320.1460.129
PPStructureV3Qwen3 14B0.1230.1330.124
PPStructureV3Qwen3 32B0.1570.1630.157
PPStructureV3Qwen3 235B0.1760.1910.179
PytesseractQwen3 0.6B0.0050.0050.005
PytesseractQwen3 4B0.0910.0950.092
PytesseractQwen3 14B0.0860.1000.091
PytesseractQwen3 32B0.0900.0960.092

为什么重要

这项研究用具体数据说明,认为'更大更新的开源模型自然更可靠'的假设在受监管的高风险文档处理场景中存在明显风险。对于要依据欧盟AI法案等规则评估AI系统的从业者而言,它表明OCR输出是否保留文档结构,与所用模型本身的能力同样重要。

本文术语

  • OCR · 光学字符识别,把图片中的文字转换成机器可读文本的技术
  • LLM · 大语言模型,基于大量文本训练的文本处理AI模型
  • VLM · 视觉语言模型,能同时处理图像和文本的AI模型
  • 零样本(zero-shot) · 不针对具体任务做额外训练,直接使用预训练模型完成任务
  • F1分数 · 综合衡量抽取是否遗漏(召回率)和抽取是否准确(精确率)的指标,越接近1越好

无法转载的图表

  • Figure 3: Tokenization visualized
在原文中查看图表 →

论文原文摘要(英文)

The extraction of structured information from unstructured documents represents a critical component of digital transformations in all sectors. While proprietary solutions dominate commercial applications, a rapidly growing ecosystem of open-source Optical Character Recognition (OCR) engines, Large Language Models (LLMs), and Vision-Language Models (VLMs) offers accessible alternatives. However, systematic evaluations on realistic, multi-step extraction pipelines remain scarce. Responsible usage of such extraction tools require comprehensive evaluations on realistic tasks, especially as these solutions will be key components of applications in the public sector that the EU AI act categorizes as high risk. To address this gap we present a comprehensive benchmark assessing the end-to-end performance of open-source systems on a complex real-world document processing task classified as high risk: Student applications for an international study program. We conduct a comprehensive empirical evaluation with state-of-the-art OCR engines, LLMs and VLMs. Our results reveal that while VLMs generally outperform OCR+LLM pipelines, even state-of-the-art open-source models struggle to handle such tasks reliably in zero-shot settings. Only 4 of 35 configurations achieved F1 scores above 0.5, with the best OCR+LLM pipeline matching top VLM performance, though most OCR+LLM combinations performed substantially worse. Roughly 75\% of all configurations scored below 0.25. Model scale influences performance, yet the relationship is non-linear: substantially larger models do not guarantee proportionally better results. Input quality, particularly the structural preservation of OCR output, emerges as a critical factor independent of downstream model capability.

作者 · Elias Schubert, Felix Bie{\ss}mann

在 arXiv 阅读

最新论文

全部论文 →

METAL MEDIA 最新报道

图片来源: Elias Schubert et al., arXiv:2608.18289, CC BY-SA 4.0