REVIEW 1 cited by
Aligning benchmark datasets for table structure recognition
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Aligning benchmark datasets for table structure recognition
read the original abstract
Benchmark datasets for table structure recognition (TSR) must be carefully processed to ensure they are annotated consistently. However, even if a dataset's annotations are self-consistent, there may be significant inconsistency across datasets, which can harm the performance of models trained and evaluated on them. In this work, we show that aligning these benchmarks$\unicode{x2014}$removing both errors and inconsistency between them$\unicode{x2014}$improves model performance significantly. We demonstrate this through a data-centric approach where we adopt one model architecture, the Table Transformer (TATR), that we hold fixed throughout. Baseline exact match accuracy for TATR evaluated on the ICDAR-2013 benchmark is 65% when trained on PubTables-1M, 42% when trained on FinTabNet, and 69% combined. After reducing annotation mistakes and inter-dataset inconsistency, performance of TATR evaluated on ICDAR-2013 increases substantially to 75% when trained on PubTables-1M, 65% when trained on FinTabNet, and 81% combined. We show through ablations over the modification steps that canonicalization of the table annotations has a significantly positive effect on performance, while other choices balance necessary trade-offs that arise when deciding a benchmark dataset's final composition. Overall we believe our work has significant implications for benchmark design for TSR and potentially other tasks as well. Dataset processing and training code will be released at https://github.com/microsoft/table-transformer.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
LLM-as-a-Judge Scores Are Unreliable Optimization Signals in Closed-Loop Table Recognition
Reference-free LLM judge scores failed to select better table-extraction outputs over eight regeneration iterations on FinTabNet and OmniDocBench; keeping the first output was safest.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.