MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391719216 · doi:10.21608/jocc.2024.339920

Handwritten Arabic Bills Reader and Recognizer

2024· article· en· W4391719216 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Sweidan, M. Hammam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computing and Communication · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArabicComputer scienceNatural language processingSpeech recognitionArtificial intelligenceLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In pursuit of Egypt's Vision 2030, which emphasizes the pivotal role of governance within state institutions and society, artificial intelligence (AI) stands as a transformative force. A central tenet of this vision involves harnessing AI technologies to accelerate the digitization of documents and their seamless integration into a unified system. This fosters more informed decision-making processes and revolutionizes processing and utilizing information. Our current research project aligns with this broader goal by deep learning capabilities to support organizations involved in enterprise applications. By incorporating AI-driven solutions, we aim to empower these organizations to manage their operations and optimize resource allocation efficiently. The proposed model eliminates manual input of handwritten invoices into ERP applications, resulting in substantive cost savings. Furthermore, the proposed model integrates an entity classification system enhanced by LSTM, significantly improving invoice data's clarity and accuracy. This streamlined approach saves valuable time and enhances the overall effectiveness of resource allocation and decision-making processes. In essence, by integrating AI into document management and enterprise operations, we are not only contributing to the realization of Egypt's vision but also spearheading a technological transformation that has far-reaching implications for governance, efficiency, and progress in the digital age.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computing and CommunicationSame topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207