Does FutureSmart Document Intelligence extract the same field across different layouts?
FutureSmart Document Intelligence extracted the same field correctly across three differently laid-out documents. The baseline receipt, the invoice, and the stacked receipt all returned the right identifiers and amounts; the tax field format varied, and the invoice was labeled as an invoice while the other two were receipts.
1 of 1 test case passed
Every test case in this scenario has a result.
The test case
Each test case is judged on its own: Pass, Fail, Not gradable, or Untested. The scenario result above counts this row.
Same field across three layoutsPassEvidence
The tool returned 3 files.
- identifier_number
- RHS-70234
- total_due
- 90.1
- document_type
- receipt
- file_name
- TC1_TC4_TC5A_baseline_receipt_1.pdf
Show the whole file (1 KB)
{ "summary": "This document is a service receipt from Riverside Home Services for a boiler annual inspection performed for Mr. Grant Sullivan. It details the service provided, the subtotal, the applied tax, and the final total amount due.", "document_type": "receipt", "identifier_number": "RHS-70234", "subtotal": 85, "currency": "USD", "tax": "$5.10", "total_due": 90.1, "file_name": "TC1_TC4_TC5A_baseline_receipt_1.pdf" }
- identifier_number
- GLR-98213
- total_due
- 227.33
- document_type
- invoice
- file_name
- TC5B_altlabel_receipt.pdf
Show the whole file (1 KB)
{ "summary": "This document is an invoice from GreenLeaf Appliance Repair for a refrigerator compressor replacement service provided to Ms. Priya Anand. It details the service cost, applicable sales tax, and the final total amount due.", "document_type": "invoice", "identifier_number": "GLR-98213", "subtotal": 210, "currency": "USD", "tax": "$17.33", "total_due": 227.33, "file_name": "TC5B_altlabel_receipt.pdf" }
- identifier_number
- SPD-2026-0714
- total_due
- 157.5
- file_name
- TC5C_altlayout_receipt.pdf
Show the whole file (1 KB)
{ "summary": "This document is a service receipt from Sunrise Plumbing & Drain for a drain line snake service provided to Mr. Daniel Osei. It details the service date, technician, and the total amount due including tax.", "document_type": "receipt", "identifier_number": "SPD-2026-0714", "subtotal": 150, "currency": "USD", "tax": "7.50", "total_due": 157.5, "file_name": "TC5C_altlayout_receipt.pdf" }
| ✓ | Expected: The right value from each document.Found: All three layouts returned their correct identifiers and totals. |
Each output matched its own source document rather than the other outputs, and the three layouts used different label wording, label positions, and number formats.
Tax format varies. The tax field comes back as a string in all three runs, with currency marks on two results and none on one; the numbers are correct.
Type follows source. The invoice is labeled as an invoice, while the other two documents are labeled as receipts.
In output 3, the stacked receipt, tax is returned as 7.50 without a dollar sign; the amount matches the source.
In the baseline receipt screenshot, only the extracted-field panel is visible; the document preview is not shown.
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.
How this scenario is graded
How we decide Pass, Fail and Not gradable. The same rules apply to every tool tested on this scenario.
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.
- 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.
| Level | Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Benchmark | Structured Document Extraction → | 19 scenarios · 10 tools |
| Capability | Field Extraction → | |
| Scenario | The same field across layouts → | |
| Tool | FutureSmart Document Intelligence → |
Global scenario definition → · Global capability definition →
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.
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.
You run the same kind of test against your own setup and get the same behaviour.
Agree →Yours behaves differently. Tell us what you got, with a screenshot if you have one.
Disagree →Something here is wrong — a reference value, a transcription, a grade.
Report an issue →Tell us what changed and we schedule a rerun of the failing test case. The old result stays as history.
Vendor notice →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.
File fingerprints (SHA-256)
A fingerprint identifies the exact file used for this result.