Extend AI in Structured Document Extraction
Scenario-level performance from current published Results.
10 of 20 scenarios published
Where Extend AI failed
1 of 10 graded scenarios. Open a Result to see the conversation and the evidence.
Aggregate across documents
Extend AI returned £7,838.04 instead of the required £9,592.44 when asked to total three invoices. The shortfall equals one invoice’s £1,754.40 contribution.
View Result →How Extend AI performed
Open a capability to explore its scenarios. Each row reports the test set in its published Result.
Field Extraction3 pass2 no Result yet
Capability in this benchmark →
| Scenario | Published outcomes | Test coverage | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| The field is absent | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI passes this absent-field case: it returned null for the added field and no grounding to an invented value. The receipt contains no loyalty or membership data, and the response carries an empty citations array. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
| The same field across layouts | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI returned the correct value for the same field across documents laid out differently. The shown runs returned $90.10, $227.33, and USD 157.50, each matching its source document. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
| The value is directly available | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI passed the directly available value scenario. It returned the receipt number once under its label, and the JSON result matched that value as a string. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
| The value must be derived | No published result | ||
| The value needs a supplied definition | No published result | ||
Nested & Repeated Fields2 pass2 no Result yet
Capability in this benchmark →
| Scenario | Published outcomes | Test coverage | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| The set contains a non-record | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI extracted the genuine invoice items without including the total row. It returned five items from five genuine source rows, with none missing or substituted. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
| The set is legitimately empty | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI returned an empty set for the legitimately empty document. The extracted set of damage or exception entries is empty, and the source references are empty too. Page 3 says no damage or exceptions were reported. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
| A repeated set of records | No published result | ||
| The set continues across a page break | No published result | ||
OCR2 pass
Capability in this benchmark →
| Scenario | Published outcomes | Test coverage | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| A cleanly scanned document | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI passed this scenario. It returned the same three values from the digital invoice and the scanned twin, and the twin file was image-only. The digital run and the scanned run are shown separately, with different file IDs and matching invoice details: total due £1,754.40, invoice date 10 March 2026, and invoice number TPH-3301. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
| A document mixing digital and scanned pages | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI returned the requested values from a document mixing digital and scanned pages. The decision-relevant finding is that the image-only page was processed rather than skipped: the scanned-page values and the digital-page values both came back correct in one extraction call. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
Querying1 fail2 no Result yet
Capability in this benchmark →
| Scenario | Published outcomes | Test coverage | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aggregate across documents | 0 Pass1 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case failedWhat happenedExtend AI returned £7,838.04 instead of the required £9,592.44 when asked to total three invoices. The shortfall equals one invoice’s £1,754.40 contribution. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
| Filter records across documents | No published result | ||
| The answer was never in the schema | No published result | ||
Source Grounding2 pass
Capability in this benchmark →
| Scenario | Published outcomes | Test coverage | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| The field is absent | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI passes this absent-field case: it returned null for the added field and no grounding to an invented value. The receipt contains no loyalty or membership data, and the response carries an empty citations array. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
| Trace a value to its location | 1 Pass0 Fail0 Not gradable 1 of 1 test case passedWhat happenedExtend AI traced the returned value to the correct document location. It returned 6103 with a citation to page 2 on "Subtotal" beside £6,103.00. The PDF shows "Subtotal" once on page 2 and not on page 1. | 1/1 assessed1/1 gradablePublished test set | View Result → |
Review and Correction3 no Result yet
Capability in this benchmark →
| Scenario | Published outcomes | Test coverage | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Correct a field value | No published result | ||
| Corrected data goes downstream | No published result | ||
| Repair a record | No published result | ||
Training1 no Result yet
Capability in this benchmark →
| Scenario | Published outcomes | Test coverage | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| A field the tool can only get right from examples | No published result | ||
Reading these Results
Published evidence and test coverage answer different questions.
Which scenarios have a Result?
A published Result is public evidence for this tool on one scenario. “No published result” does not say whether testing has taken place.
What does each Result cover?
Assessed includes Pass, Fail and Not gradable. Gradable includes Pass and Fail. Both use the pinned test count in that published Result.
Out of 19 scenarios
The summary counts each of the 19 scenarios once. A scenario fails when any of its published test cases failed. “No published Result yet” means nothing is public for that scenario; it does not say whether Extend AI was tested on it.