Fails to keep dense transaction rows fully distinct: the report says transaction descriptions were merged, dates were missing on 15+ transactions, and adjacent rows collapse into a single record on the highlighted statement crops.
What was measured
Table & Record Completeness
Are all tabular rows and line items extracted without merging, duplication, omission, or phantom records?
decisive for this rankingtransformation
Missing, duplicated, or merged rows and line items directly corrupt the structured dataset and break query results. (3 of 3 judges)
What was given, what came back
Test input: Bank Statement PDF · pdf · group: business-document-extraction
Input — what we sent
Bank Statement PDF
A four-page bank statement PDF with dense transaction tables, balance-forward bridges, account metadata, rewards data, and disclaimer text. It was used to stress schema-driven extraction, multi-page continuity, row completeness, and financial numerical accuracy.
Why this input is hard
- · Table extraction across 50+ transaction rows
- · Multi-page continuity with balance-forward bridges
- · Parsing structured account metadata alongside unstructured transaction descriptions
- · Numerical accuracy for deposits, withdrawals, running balances, and summaries
- · Extraction of nested rewards and disclaimer sections
Output — unretouched
No output artifact
The verdict rests on the tester's written observation alone — no file was captured for this cell.
Also checked on this input — same tool, 3 other criteria
Extraction Accuracy✓ WorkedCorrectly extracts high-level statement values, including account number 42710540422 and total deposits 70986.83, rather than corrupting the header fields.Schema Adherence✓ WorkedPreserves the supplied bank-statement hierarchy in structured JSON, with nested statement.metadata, account_holder, account, balances, transactions, summary, rewards, and disclaimers objects instead of flattening the document into OCR text.Semantic Field Enrichment✗ FailedDoes not derive transaction_type on the bank statement at all; the report states that transaction_type is null for every extracted transaction.
Provenance
- Observation
- 970f1a45-0c57-4074-87b5-f6d3edc022e9
- Evidence run
- a061b9e7-a9c5-443d-a171-b296aaf51b8c
- Study
- Extract and query structured data from documents using natural language
- Research task
- 86b9y25e5
- Tested at
- not recorded
- Source
- first-party
- Evidence state
- verified
- Proof shown
- input only
- Cost / latency
- not captured
- Repeat run
- not captured
- Tester
- not captured
The last three rows are honest blanks, not placeholders — our capture has no field for them yet.
Query this
get_evidence({
tool: "nanonets",
scenario: "business-document-extraction"
})MCP · mcp.aidemos.com/api/mcp
Free with attribution.
Same input, same check — 7 other tools
measured on Table & Record Completeness
Datalab⚠ StruggledMerges adjacent bank-statement rows into one record; the 21 Jun crop shows two separate transactions, but the extracted description collapses them into one long UPI/merchant string.Docsumo✗ FailedIt inflates repeated carry-forward content into extra records, returning 55 rows for a statement that actually contains 52 distinct transactions because the BALANCE FORWARD line is duplicated across page breaks.Landing AI✓ WorkedReturns the full transaction table as separate records; the report says all 51 statement entries were extracted without collapsing rows or dropping records.LlamaParse◐ MixedThe tool preserves transaction rows as separate records and maintains order, but the extracted transaction list is inconsistent in size: the report says the array contains 54 records even though the source statement has 51, and the summary shows 44 total_transactions.Reducto✗ FailedOver-produces the repeating transaction table, returning 53 transaction records when the bank statement contains 51, indicating row-count drift in line-item extraction.Retab◐ MixedOvercounts the bank-statement transaction table in the summary, reporting total_transactions 43 when the researcher says 40 should be counted after excluding balance-forward, tax, and charge entries.Unstract✓ WorkedKeeps the bank transaction table complete across all 4 pages, with the report stating the transactions array contains all 51 entries and no rows were dropped or merged.
This evidence is published in
Real inputs and real outputs, no retouching · every cell queryable via API & MCP · aidemos.com