Table Extraction with Table Data Using VGG-19 Deep Learning Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, significant progress has been achieved in understanding and processing tabular data. However, existing approaches often rely on task-specific features and model architectures, posing challenges in accurately extracting table structures amidst diverse layouts, styles, and noise contamination. This study introduces a comprehensive deep learning methodology that is tailored for the precise identification and extraction of rows and columns from document images that contain tables. The proposed model employs table detection and structure recognition to delineate table and column areas, followed by semantic rule-based approaches for row extraction within tabular sub-regions. The evaluation was performed on the publicly available Marmot data table datasets and demonstrates state-of-the-art performance. Additionally, transfer learning using VGG-19 is employed for fine-tuning the model, enhancing its capability further. Furthermore, this project fills a void in the Marmot dataset by providing it with extra annotations for table structure, expanding its scope to encompass column detection in addition to table identification.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".