LiveWeb-IE: A Benchmark For Online Web Information Extraction

Seungbin Yang, Jihwan Kim, Jaemin Choi, Dongjin Kim, Soyoung Yang, ChaeHun Park, Jaegul Choo · Mar 14, 2026 · Citations: 0

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Web information extraction (WIE) is the task of automatically extracting data from web pages, offering high utility for various applications. The evaluation of WIE systems has traditionally relied on benchmarks built from HTML snapshots captured at a single point in time. However, this offline evaluation paradigm fails to account for the temporally evolving nature of the web; consequently, performance on these static benchmarks often fails to generalize to dynamic real-world scenarios. To bridge this gap, we introduce \dataset, a new benchmark designed for evaluating WIE systems directly against live websites. Based on trusted and permission-granted websites, we curate natural language queries that require information extraction of various data categories, such as text, images, and hyperlinks. We further design these queries to represent four levels of complexity, based on the number and cardinality of attributes to be extracted, enabling a granular assessment of WIE systems. In addition, we propose Visual Grounding Scraper (VGS), a novel multi-stage agentic framework that mimics human cognitive processes by visually narrowing down web page content to extract desired information. Extensive experiments across diverse backbone models demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of VGS. We believe that this study lays the foundation for developing practical and robust WIE systems.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.
The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 15%

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.