Update app.py
Browse files
app.py
CHANGED
@@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ def process_document(image,sendimg):
|
|
79 |
return processor.token2json(sequence), image
|
80 |
|
81 |
title = '<table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" ><tbody><tr><td style="text-align:center"><img alt="" src="https://huggingface.co/spaces/to-be/invoice_document_headers_extraction_with_donut/resolve/main/circling_small.gif" style="float:right; height:50px; width:50px" /></td><td style="text-align:center"><h1>Demo: invoice header extraction with Donut</h1></td><td style="text-align:center"><img alt="" src="https://huggingface.co/spaces/to-be/invoice_document_headers_extraction_with_donut/resolve/main/circling2_small.gif" style="float:left; height:50px; width:50px" /></td></tr></tbody></table>'
|
82 |
-
paragraph0 = '<p><strong>(update 29/03/2023: for
|
83 |
paragraph1 = '<p>Basic idea of the base 🍩 model is to give it an image as input and extract indexes as text. No bounding boxes or confidences are generated.<br /> I finetuned it on invoices. For more info, see the <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.15664">original paper</a> and the 🤗 <a href="https://huggingface.co/naver-clova-ix/donut-base">model</a>.</p>'
|
84 |
paragraph2 = '<p><strong>Training</strong>:<br />The model was trained with a few thousand of annotated invoices and non-invoices (for those the doctype will be 'Other'). They span across different countries and languages. They are always one page only. The dataset is proprietary unfortunately. Model is set to input resolution of 1280x1920 pixels. So any sample you want to try with higher dpi than 150 has no added value.<br />It was trained for about 4 hours on a NVIDIA RTX A4000 for 20k steps with a val_metric of 0.03413819904382196 at the end.<br />The <u>following indexes</u> were included in the train set:</p><ul><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">DocType</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">Currency</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">DocumentDate</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">GrossAmount</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">InvoiceNumber</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">NetAmount</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">TaxAmount</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">OrderNumber</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">CreditorCountry</span></span></li></ul>'
|
85 |
paragraph3 = '<p><strong>Benchmark observations:</strong><br />From all documents in the validation set, 60% of them had all indexes captured correctly.</p><p>Here are the results per index:</p><p style="margin-left:40px"><img alt="" src="https://s3.amazonaws.com/moonup/production/uploads/1677749023966-6335a49ceb6132ca653239a0.png" style="height:70%; width:70%" /></p><p>Some other observations:<br />- when trying with a non invoice document, it's quite reliably identified as Doctype: 'Other'<br />- validation set contained mostly same layout invoices as the train set. If it was validated against completely differently sourced invoices, the results would be different<br />- Document date is able to be recognized across different notations, however, it's often wrong because the data set was not diverse (as in time span of dates) enough</p>'
|
|
|
79 |
return processor.token2json(sequence), image
|
80 |
|
81 |
title = '<table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" ><tbody><tr><td style="text-align:center"><img alt="" src="https://huggingface.co/spaces/to-be/invoice_document_headers_extraction_with_donut/resolve/main/circling_small.gif" style="float:right; height:50px; width:50px" /></td><td style="text-align:center"><h1>Demo: invoice header extraction with Donut</h1></td><td style="text-align:center"><img alt="" src="https://huggingface.co/spaces/to-be/invoice_document_headers_extraction_with_donut/resolve/main/circling2_small.gif" style="float:left; height:50px; width:50px" /></td></tr></tbody></table>'
|
82 |
+
paragraph0 = '<p><strong>(update 29/03/2023: for more info, you can read <a href="https://toon-beerten.medium.com/hands-on-document-data-extraction-with-transformer-7130df3b6132">my article on medium</a>)<br />(update 28/04/2023: want to finetune with your own data? Read <a href="https://towardsdatascience.com/ocr-free-document-data-extraction-with-transformers-1-2-b5a826bc2ac3">this article</a>)</strong></p>'
|
83 |
paragraph1 = '<p>Basic idea of the base 🍩 model is to give it an image as input and extract indexes as text. No bounding boxes or confidences are generated.<br /> I finetuned it on invoices. For more info, see the <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.15664">original paper</a> and the 🤗 <a href="https://huggingface.co/naver-clova-ix/donut-base">model</a>.</p>'
|
84 |
paragraph2 = '<p><strong>Training</strong>:<br />The model was trained with a few thousand of annotated invoices and non-invoices (for those the doctype will be 'Other'). They span across different countries and languages. They are always one page only. The dataset is proprietary unfortunately. Model is set to input resolution of 1280x1920 pixels. So any sample you want to try with higher dpi than 150 has no added value.<br />It was trained for about 4 hours on a NVIDIA RTX A4000 for 20k steps with a val_metric of 0.03413819904382196 at the end.<br />The <u>following indexes</u> were included in the train set:</p><ul><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">DocType</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">Currency</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">DocumentDate</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">GrossAmount</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">InvoiceNumber</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">NetAmount</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">TaxAmount</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">OrderNumber</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family:Calibri"><span style="color:black">CreditorCountry</span></span></li></ul>'
|
85 |
paragraph3 = '<p><strong>Benchmark observations:</strong><br />From all documents in the validation set, 60% of them had all indexes captured correctly.</p><p>Here are the results per index:</p><p style="margin-left:40px"><img alt="" src="https://s3.amazonaws.com/moonup/production/uploads/1677749023966-6335a49ceb6132ca653239a0.png" style="height:70%; width:70%" /></p><p>Some other observations:<br />- when trying with a non invoice document, it's quite reliably identified as Doctype: 'Other'<br />- validation set contained mostly same layout invoices as the train set. If it was validated against completely differently sourced invoices, the results would be different<br />- Document date is able to be recognized across different notations, however, it's often wrong because the data set was not diverse (as in time span of dates) enough</p>'
|