ExtractBench: A Benchmark for Schema-Guided Enterprise Document Extraction
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
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}.
Results and benchmarks
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.
| Task | Dataset | Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic tool use | Micro1 LongExtract-50 | Schemas/types | 50 | paper-derived |
Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure below.
Evidence graph: 3 refs, 2 links.
Utility signals: depth 95/100, grounding 78/100, status high.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- Use the paper-linked Hugging Face release as the starting artifact, then reconstruct training and evaluation settings from the paper.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days · Best available artifact: SEOKDONG/Qwen3.5-9B-kor-enterprise
No direct maintained repository implementation was found, but paper-linked Hugging Face artifacts are available.
- Estimate assumes artifact-level reproduction; full training reproduction may require additional paper details.
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Hugging Face artifacts
Models
- SEOKDONG/Qwen3.5-9B-kor-enterprise
44 downloads · 3 likes
Broaden model search
Datasets
Broaden dataset search
Spaces
No trustworthy spaces matches right now.
Search spaces on Hugging FaceResearch context
Tasks
Agentic tool use
Methods
Agentic systems
Domains
AI Agents
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.