LLM-based Schema-Guided Extraction and Validation of Missing-Person Intelligence from Heterogeneous Data Sources

Joshua Castillo, Ravi Mukkamala · Apr 8, 2026 · Citations: 0

Automatic Metrics

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

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Missing-person and child-safety investigations rely on heterogeneous case documents, including structured forms, bulletin-style posters, and narrative web profiles. Variations in layout, terminology, and data quality impede rapid triage, large-scale analysis, and search-planning workflows. This paper introduces the Guardian Parser Pack, an AI-driven parsing and normalization pipeline that transforms multi-source investigative documents into a unified, schema-compliant representation suitable for operational review and downstream spatial modeling. The proposed system integrates (i) multi-engine PDF text extraction with Optical Character Recognition (OCR) fallback, (ii) rule-based source identification with source-specific parsers, (iii) schema-first harmonization and validation, and (iv) an optional Large Language Model (LLM)-assisted extraction pathway incorporating validator-guided repair and shared geocoding services. We present the system architecture, key implementation decisions, and output design, and evaluate performance using both gold-aligned extraction metrics and corpus-level operational indicators. On a manually aligned subset of 75 cases, the LLM-assisted pathway achieved substantially higher extraction quality than the deterministic comparator (F1 = 0.8664 vs. 0.2578), while across 517 parsed records per pathway it also improved aggregate key-field completeness (96.97\% vs. 93.23\%). The deterministic pathway remained much faster (mean runtime 0.03 s/record vs. 3.95 s/record for the LLM pathway). In the evaluated run, all LLM outputs passed initial schema validation, so validator-guided repair functioned as a built-in safeguard rather than a contributor to the observed gains. These results support controlled use of probabilistic AI within a schema-first, auditable pipeline for high-stakes investigative settings.

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.

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

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

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

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 35%

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.