Evaluates a model's ability to localize and extract key information (KILE) and recognize line items (LIR) in business documents. It probes multi-modal document understanding, specifically token-level classification and bounding box merging based on OCR and layout features. Use when the user wants to benchmark on DocILE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill docile-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Docile Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-docile-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: docile-eval
description: Evaluates a model's ability to localize and extract key information (KILE) and recognize line items (LIR) in business documents. It probes multi-modal document understanding, specifically token-level classification and bounding box merging based on OCR and layout features. Use when the user wants to benchmark on DocILE, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2302.05658
bibtex_key: simsa2023docile
confidence: high
---
# docile-eval
> DocILE Benchmark for Document Information Localization and Extraction — Štepan Šimsa et al. (2023) (arXiv:2302.05658, 2023)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates a model's ability to localize and extract key information (KILE) and recognize line items (LIR) in business documents. It probes multi-modal document understanding, specifically token-level classification and bounding box merging based on OCR and layout features.
## Datasets
- **DocILE** — total 106700; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/rossumai/docile
## Metrics
- `F1` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Harmonic mean of precision and recall computed over all predicted token-class assignments using a standard BIO tagging scheme. Matches are determined by overlapping predicted and ground-truth bounding boxes or token sequences.
- `AP` — range: [0, 1]
- Average Precision computed from the precision-recall curve across different confidence thresholds for the multi-label classification task.
- `Precision` — range: [0, 1]
- Ratio of correctly predicted positive token-class assignments to the total number of predicted positive assignments.
- `Recall` — range: [0, 1]
- Ratio of correctly predicted positive token-class assignments to the total number of actual positive assignments in the ground truth.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Document images paired with OCR-extracted tokens, including their bounding boxes and text content. Tokens are pre-ordered in top-down, left-to-right reading order per text line.
**Output**: For each OCR token, a predicted class label from the 55 fine-grained KILE/LIR classes using a BIO tagging scheme, plus line-item boundary tags (B-I, I-I, O-I, E-I). Predictions are merged horizontally/vertically based on spatial proximity thresholds to form final text blocks and bounding boxes.
## Scoring recipe
```python
preds = model.predict(doc_image, ocr_tokens)
gold = doc.gold_annotations
true_pos = 0
false_pos = 0
false_neg = 0
for pred_group in preds:
matched = False
for gold_group in gold:
if match(pred_group, gold_group, threshold=0.5):
true_pos += 1
matched = True
break
if not matched:
false_pos += 1
for gold_group in gold:
if not any(match(pred_group, gold_group) for pred_group in preds):
false_neg += 1
precision = true_pos / (true_pos + false_pos) if (true_pos + false_pos) > 0 else 0
recall = true_pos / (true_pos + false_neg) if (true_pos + false_neg) > 0 else 0
f1 = 2 * precision * recall / (precision + recall) if (precision + recall) > 0 else 0
```
## Common pitfalls
- OCR tokens must be reordered in top-down, left-to-right order before processing; skipping this degrades performance significantly.
- Pre-training on external document datasets (e.g., IIT-CDIP) is strictly prohibited in the official benchmark, though some baselines may violate this.
- The merging strategy for final predictions is simplistic and relies on fixed spatial thresholds (e.g., 25% margin on text block height), which may not generalize to all layouts.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> The primary metric for each task is shown in bold. Table 3: Baseline results for KILE & LIR. LayoutLMv3BASE, achieving the best results, was pre-trained on another document dataset - IIT-CDIP [37], which is prohibited in the official benchmark. The best results among permitted models are underlined. The primary metric for each task is shown in bold.
<table><tr><td rowspan="2">Model</td><td colspan="4">KILE</td><td colspan="4">LIR</td></tr><tr><td>F1</td><td>AP</td><td>Prec.</td><td>Recall</td><td>F1</td><td>AP</td><td>Prec.</td><td>Recall</td></tr>
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{simsa2023docile,
title={DocILE Benchmark for Document Information Localization and Extraction},
author={Štepan Šimsa et al. (2023)},
year={2023},
note={arXiv:2302.05658}
}
```
- arXiv: 2302.05658
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!