Recent advancements in Document Layout Analysis through Large Language Models and Multimodal Models have significantly improved layout detection. However, despite these improvements, challenges remain in addressing critical structural errors, such as region merging, splitting, and missing content. Conventional evaluation metrics like IoU and mAP, which focus primarily on spatial overlap, are insufficient for detecting these errors. To address this limitation, we propose Layout Error Detection (LED), a novel benchmark designed to evaluate the structural robustness of document layout predictions. LED defines eight standardized error types, and formulates three complementary tasks: error existence detection, error type classification, and element-wise error type classification. Furthermore, we construct LED-Dataset, a synthetic dataset generated by injecting realistic structural errors based on empirical distributions from DLA models. Experimental results across a range of LMMs reveal that LED effectively differentiates structural understanding capabilities, exposing modality biases and performance trade-offs not visible through traditional metrics.
Heo et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: