Create

Sign in to ReadmeX

or

How we handle your data: Privacy Policy

ReadmeX

Your AI reading companion

What would you like to catch up on?

Pick a briefing, or ask your own question.

Your community and people briefings stay personal to you.

Story

OvisOCR3: 0.8B open-weight OCR model adds structured JSON and cross-page tables

AI summary

OvisOCR3 has been released as a 0.8B OCR model built on Qwen3.5-0.8B and published under Apache 2.0 with vLLM inference examples, according to a Reddit post in r/LocalLLaMA. Beyond OvisOCR2's Markdown parsing, the poster says it adds structured JSON output with bounding boxes, element categories and content plus a layout-only mode, key information extraction from specified fields or a supplied JSON template, figure descriptions with Mermaid output for flowcharts, and cross-page table reconstruction that parses pages and then merges table fragments with the same model. The post cites model-card numbers of 96.74 on OmniDocBench v1.6, 88.80 on MDPBench and 82.31 on PureDocBench, with the largest reported gains over OvisOCR2 on MDPBench (69.00 to 88.80) and PureDocBench (75.10 to 82.31); the poster notes these are the team's own reported figures rather than independent measurements and asks how the structure holds up on messy scans and long financial tables.

In-depth insight

A small open-weight document model with bounding boxes, key-information extraction and cross-page table merging targets the document-processing pipelines where OCR quality directly shapes downstream automation, though its benchmark claims are vendor-reported and untested independently.

OvisOCR3 is out, still based on Qwen3.5-0.8B and available under Apache 2.0, with vLLM inference examples. Compared with OvisOCR2’s Markdown parsing, it adds a few useful options: OvisOCR3 results The model card reports 96.74 on OmniDocBench v1.6, 88.80 on MDPBench, and 82.31 on PureDocBench. The bigger reported gains over OvisOCR2 are on MDPBench (69.00 → 88.80) and PureDocBench (75.10 → 82.31). The bounding-box output and cross-page tables seem particularly useful for document workflows. These are the team’s reported numbers, though; I’d be interested in how well the structure holds up on messy scans and long financial tables. Has anyone tried it locally or compared it with GLM-OCR, PaddleOCR-VL, or MinerU? Curious about VRAM usage and processing speed too. HF model card:https://huggingface.co/ATH-MaaS/OvisOCR3 submitted by /u/Sad_External6106 [link] [comments]

#OvisOCR3#OvisOCR2#Qwen3.5-0.8B#vLLM#GLM-OCR#PaddleOCR-VL#MinerU

Original · 1 min readRead the original
Group chat

No comments yet. Start the conversation.