AI Demos Research — the structured-intelligence platform. Every verdict on these pages opens to the execution behind it.
Graded 14 September 2026

Can Nanonets show where a value came from in the document?

Nanonets traced the returned subtotal to page 2, where GBP 6,103.00 is highlighted in the totals block. The exported page number was 2, and the preview highlight sat on the returned value rather than the neighboring totals.

1 of 1 test case passed

Every test case in this scenario has a result.

Pass rate100%1 of 1 with a result
Coverage1 of 1test cases with a result
1PassDid everything it was expected to do.
0FailNo test case failed.
0Not gradableEvery result here could be graded.
0UntestedEvery test case in this scenario has a result.
The pass rate is a summary. The evidence is the test case below: what we sent, what we checked, what the tool returned, and the proof.

The test case

Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above counts this row.

Pointer to where the value sitsPassEvidence
What we sent
InputDocument (PDF)
Two-page invoice showing subtotal GBP 6,103.00 on page 2.
Open the PDF ↗
Key momentsp. 2 ↗
What the tool returned
JSON4 lines
{
  "subtotal": "6,103.00",
  "page_number": 2
}

Copied from Proof 1 · Output file (JSON), lines 1–4

Open the JSON file ↗
Proof 1Output file (JSON)
Structured output with subtotal 6,103.00 and page_number 2.

Its contents are printed above, under What the tool returned.

Open the JSON file ↗
Expected vs. Found
What this scenario evaluates

These are scenario-level criteria. Each test case's Expected and Found are listed separately.

  • Whether the tool points to the document location that matches the returned value.
  • Whether the location is attached to the value it actually returned, not to a different one.
  • Whether the tool gives a source location rather than only repeating the value or naming the document.
How this scenario is judged →
✓Found: A page pointer resolved to the page containing 6,103.00.
Supporting proof
Proof 2Screenshot
Two-pane Nanonets result screenshot showing Subtotal 6,103.00 and Page Number 2, with the subtotal highlighted in the preview.
Open original ↗
Why this result

The tool returned a page pointer for the subtotal, and it resolved to page 2 where 6,103.00 appears. The page-number field also pointed to the printed page label, showing the result came from source links rather than a default guess.

Also observed on this row

Page label also highlighted. The page-number field linked to the printed page label, while the subtotal field linked to the subtotal value on page 2. The graded result depends on the subtotal link, not the page label.

Tested by Rugved nichite · evidence dated 10 September 2026

Configuration and setup

How this tool was set up for the run and what the test needed in place. Each row is a fact from the run's records; a fact the records do not hold is left out, not guessed.

Software that produced the output
Nanonets
Surface
Nanonets extraction result surface
Set up before the run
A document where the value appeared exactly once across a few pages was provided, and the product was run to extract one scalar field and trace it to its source location.
Tested
By 10 September 2026 · Rugved nichite

How this scenario is graded

How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.

How results are decided

Each test case gets one result per tool: Pass, Fail or Not gradable. A test case we haven't run yet shows Untested. There are no partial results.

The rules
  • Pass: the tool did everything the test expected, and nothing it said contradicts the correct answer.
  • Fail: at least one expected behaviour clearly didn't happen; the row says which and quotes the tool.
  • Not gradable: our evidence couldn't settle the outcome (for example a record we needed is missing). It is never counted as a fail, and the row says what's missing.

Where this sits in the benchmark

This page is one cell of a larger study: one tool, one scenario. Only this benchmark's frame appears here.

LevelNameScope
BenchmarkStructured Document Extraction →19 scenarios · 10 tools
CapabilitySource Grounding →
ScenarioTrace a value to its location →
ToolNanonets →

History of this result

What has happened to this result since it was first published. Runs and grades are never overwritten: a retest or a re-grade publishes a new result and keeps the earlier one readable.

from the publication record
9 October 2026First publishedStructured Document Extraction v1

Act on this result

Nothing filed here edits the run or the grade. A challenge opens a review, and a review can produce a new run or a re-grade — which becomes the current result and leaves this one in the history.

This matches what I see

You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.

Agree →
This does not match

Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.

Disagree →
Point out an issue

Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.

Report an issue →
Request a retest

On a newer build, a larger dataset, or your own setup.

Request a retest →
We have fixed this

Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.

Vendor notice →
Filed against this evidenceNothing yet. Challenges, counter-evidence and fix notices appear here with their outcome, and stay on the page after they are resolved.
Cite this result
aidemos.com/benchmarks/structured-document-extraction/results/nanonets/trace-a-value-to-its-location · 1 pass · 0 fail · coverage 1/1 · graded 2026-09-14

The same record is available as structured data through the AI Demos MCP server, with the counts, the coverage and every per-test-case reason carried as fields.

Verify the proof files

These files support this result. Open a file to inspect the original evidence.

Proof 2 · Screenshot ↗image/png · 117 KB
Proof 1 · Output file (JSON) ↗application/json · 0 KB
Input · Document (PDF) ↗application/pdf · 82 KB
File fingerprints (SHA-256)

A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.

Proof 2 · Screenshot00dab1f7299d09a548d37f2ac1afca44d802b7034782104066e715b17cc535ea
Proof 1 · Output file (JSON)6ab7c9e798fb772d29d1f7cad60a61451ac4ffde217ddae029f972ec663a5a99
Input · Document (PDF)d1f3282702260730267278b1071ee30cf79918fa8489d9411c98d8f6e5209f18