/ Paper arXiv 2611.02775
In short
In shortReport a mistake
Abstract
From the paperThe authors' own words.
Financial document recognition is often assessed using character and word error rates, although these metrics do not express whether a system preserves the financial facts on which people and organisations act. This paper develops a human-centred, risk-constrained framework for evaluating financial document recognition as evidence recovery and decision support. It defines typed financial facts linked to visible source regions and separates verbatim transcription, deterministic normalization, and business interpretation. A layered quality model covers text, localization, layout, tables, fields, fact correctness, evidence grounding, uncertainty, robustness, and operational performance. Non-compensatory acceptance gates use one-sided uncertainty bounds for critical-field errors, preventing strong aggregate scores from masking failures in amounts, identifiers, signs, periods, or entity associations. Selective automation is formulated as a constrained routing problem that accounts for residual risk, human-review capacity, and review cost. The framework further specifies annotation and adjudication procedures, leakage-resistant benchmark partitions, statistical estimands, subgroup analyses, and a reproducibility card. Formal results establish the limitations of compensatory scoring, the non-zero upper risk bound after zero observed errors, and a loss sensitive decision rule for routing uncertain cases to human review. The contribution is theoretical and methodological; no new model, dataset, or empirical performance result is claimed.
From the full paper
From the paperCopied from the paper itself by our code.
Reading the paper on arXiv…
Where it fits
The most cited papers it builds on, and the papers that build on it.
/ Builds on 3 most cited
- 200728.5k citedAn Introduction to the Bootstrap
- 197927.3k citedA Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure
- 196514.5k citedBinary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals
/ Built on by None yet
No papers cite it yet. We check again every week.
From Semantic Scholar, updated weekly.
Ask this paper
/ Ask a questionAnswers come from the full paper and name the section
/ Your notes
Select text in the abstract to highlight it or add a note. They stay in this browser.