Aneiss Ghodsi

Kenza Benkirane, Dan Goldwater, Martin Asenov et al.

Document intelligence requires accurate text extraction and reliable reasoning over document content. We introduce \textbf{DISCO}, a \emph{Document Intelligence Suite for COmparative Evaluation}, that evaluates optical character recognition (OCR) pipelines and vision-language models (VLMs) separately on parsing and question answering across diverse document types, including handwritten text, multilingual scripts, medical forms, infographics, and multi-page documents. Our evaluation shows that performance varies substantially across tasks and document characteristics, underscoring the need for complexity-aware approach selection. OCR pipelines are generally more reliable for handwriting and for long or multi-page documents, where explicit text grounding supports text-heavy reasoning, while VLMs perform better on multilingual text and visually rich layouts. Task-aware prompting yields mixed effects, improving performance on some document types while degrading it on others. These findings provide empirical guidance for selecting document processing strategies based on document structure and reasoning demands.

Martin Asenov, Kenza Benkirane, Dan Goldwater et al.

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) is a common way to ground language models in external documents and up-to-date information. Classical retrieval systems relied on lexical methods such as BM25, which rank documents by term overlap with corpus-level weighting. End-to-end multimodal retrievers trained on large query-document datasets claim substantial improvements over these approaches, especially for multilingual documents with complex visual layouts. We demonstrate that better document representation is the primary driver of benchmark improvements. By systematically varying transcription and preprocessing methods while holding the retrieval mechanism fixed, we demonstrate that BM25 can recover large gaps on multilingual and visual benchmarks. Our findings call for decomposed evaluation benchmarks that separately measure transcription and retrieval capabilities, enabling the field to correctly attribute progress and focus effort where it matters.

Karel D'Oosterlinck, François Remy, Johannes Deleu et al.

Timely and accurate extraction of Adverse Drug Events (ADE) from biomedical literature is paramount for public safety, but involves slow and costly manual labor. We set out to improve drug safety monitoring (pharmacovigilance, PV) through the use of Natural Language Processing (NLP). We introduce BioDEX, a large-scale resource for Biomedical adverse Drug Event Extraction, rooted in the historical output of drug safety reporting in the U.S. BioDEX consists of 65k abstracts and 19k full-text biomedical papers with 256k associated document-level safety reports created by medical experts. The core features of these reports include the reported weight, age, and biological sex of a patient, a set of drugs taken by the patient, the drug dosages, the reactions experienced, and whether the reaction was life threatening. In this work, we consider the task of predicting the core information of the report given its originating paper. We estimate human performance to be 72.0% F1, whereas our best model achieves 62.3% F1, indicating significant headroom on this task. We also begin to explore ways in which these models could help professional PV reviewers. Our code and data are available: https://github.com/KarelDO/BioDEX.