OmniAI OCR Benchmark

Data

ocr benchmark

SHOW HN2025

146points
40comments
#510of 3,837 in 2025
Top 14%of 2025 by points

How HN took it

CuriousMostly questions and neutral comments

1 positive, 12 neutral or asking, 1 mixed, 9 critical, out of 23 comments about the project. Thread score -0.20.

Execution: 0 for, 4 againstPerformance: 1 for, 2 againstPrivacy: 0 for, 2 againstIdea: 0 for, 1 against

The thread, comment by comment

Each row is a top-level comment and its replies, in HN's order. Select a cell to open that comment on HN.

positive neutral or mixed critical about another commenter or something else the maker

What HN said

What people liked

  • Honest, open data release from OmniAI

    From 1 comment
    • As far as I'm concerned, all of these specialty services are dead compared to a generalized LLM like OpenAI or Gemini. I wrote in a previous post about how NLP services were dead…
      blindriver on HN
  • Gemini Flash 2.0 is a strong, cheap OCR option

    From 2 comments
    • A big takeaway for me is that Gemini Flash 2.0 is a great solution to OCR, considering accessibility, cost, accuracy, and speed. It also has a 1M token context window, though…
      jasonjmcghee on HN
    • As far as I'm concerned, all of these specialty services are dead compared to a generalized LLM like OpenAI or Gemini. I wrote in a previous post about how NLP services were dead…
      blindriver on HN

Objections

  • GPT-4o as judge and structured extraction task is not a true OCR benchmark

    From 2 comments
    • I’m definitely not getting that takeaway. This wasn’t even an OCR benchmark: the task was structured data extraction, and deterministic metrics were set aside in favor of…
      anon373839 on HN
    • GPT-4o as a judge to evaluate the quality of something which gpt4o is not inherently that good at. Red flag.
      danielcampos93 on HN
  • Accuracy of 87-92% is still too error-prone for numbers and money

    From 2 comments
    • YES >>5% accuracy can be worth a lot. Most surprising to me about these results is the BEST error rate was over 8% errors (91.7% accuracy) and the worse was 40%. Their method of…
      toss1 on HN
    • I think 87% to 92% accuracy really isn't much difference. You're still going to get errors to the point where the level and amount of checking you need to do isn't affected. Even…
      blindriver on HN
  • VLMs can hallucinate and correct source documents, unsuitable for important OCR

    From 2 comments
    • I’m definitely not getting that takeaway. This wasn’t even an OCR benchmark: the task was structured data extraction, and deterministic metrics were set aside in favor of…
      anon373839 on HN
    • We've tested basic prompt injections within images, but not been able to reliably trigger any adverse effects. However there are two big bugs we've found with VLMs: 1. Correcting…
      themanmaran on HN

Requests

  • Add open models like Qwen 2.5 VL and small VLMs

    From 4 comments
    • Thank you for sharing this. Some of the other public models that we can host ourselves may perform in practice better than the models listed - e.g. Qwen 2.5 VL…
      betula_ai on HN
    • Anyone have tried comparing with Qwen VL based model? I heard good things about its performance on ocr compared to other self hostable model, but haven't really tried…
      banditelol on HN
    • Yes I'd like to see this repeated with any of the small VLM's like IBM Granite or the HF Smols. Pretty much anything in the sub 7B range.
      jimmySixDOF on HN
    • Wondering why Florence-2 is not on the list of models?
      default_ on HN
  • Add free engines like Tesseract for comparison

    From 1 comment
    • Also, what's strange is there's no free of paid OCR engine is added to the mix for the evaluation. Tessaract is built specially for OCR'in scanned documents, and it has a both…
      bayindirh on HN
  • Benchmark prompt injection risks in OCR

    From 1 comment
    • The benchmark I most want to see around OCR is one that covers risks from accidental (or deliberate) prompt injection - I want to know how likely it is that a model might OCR a…
      simonw on HN

Questions

  • What is the privacy of documents sent to the cloud API?

    From 1 comment
    • What is the privacy of the documents for the cloud service? There’s nothing in the privacy policy about data sent over the api.
      bn-l on HN
  • How does this compare to Marker?

    From 1 comment
    • How does this compare to Marker https://github.com/VikParuchuri/marker?
      gbertb on HN
  • Which VLMs are used in OmniAI?

    From 2 comments
    • What kind of VLMs are being used in OmniAI? I fine-tuned a Llama 3.2 Vision on a small dataset I created for extracting text without heavy cropping. Results are simply amazing in…
      hasibzunair on HN
    • What VLMs do you use when you're listing OmniAI - is this mostly wrapping the model providers like your zerox repo?
      fzysingularity on HN

Alternatives named

  • Google Gemini

    From 2 comments
    • As far as I'm concerned, all of these specialty services are dead compared to a generalized LLM like OpenAI or Gemini. I wrote in a previous post about how NLP services were dead…
      blindriver on HN
    • A big takeaway for me is that Gemini Flash 2.0 is a great solution to OCR, considering accessibility, cost, accuracy, and speed. It also has a 1M token context window, though…
      jasonjmcghee on HN
  • Tesseract

    From 1 comment
    • Also, what's strange is there's no free of paid OCR engine is added to the mix for the evaluation. Tessaract is built specially for OCR'in scanned documents, and it has a both…
      bayindirh on HN
  • ABBYY FineReader

    From 1 comment
    • > What would be interesting is finding which two OCR/AI systems make the most different mistakes and running documents against both. Flagging only the disagreements for human…
      sgc on HN
  • Marker

    From 1 comment
    • How does this compare to Marker https://github.com/VikParuchuri/marker?
      gbertb on HN

Category, keywords, summaries and labels on this page were made by AI (Thread Reader v2) and not checked by hand. Each point links to the comments it came from.

Add a badge to your READMEShown on HackerShow
[![Shown on HackerShow](https://hackershow.org/badge.svg)](https://hackershow.org/show/43118514)