Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Mistral OCR 3 is ideal for both high-volume enterprise pipelines and interactive document workflows.

I don’t know how they can make this statement with 79% accuracy rate. For any serious use case, this is an unacceptable number.

I work with scientific journals and issues like 2.9+0.5 and 29+0.5 is something we regularly run into that has us never being able to fully trust automated processes and require human verification every step.





Those are tricky! We've found https://www.datalab.to/ to be good for this @ thesynthesis.company

Where are you seeing 79% accuracy? 79% only occurs on the page as a win rate, not an accuracy

And I believe the number is 74%, compared to OCR 2.

What matters is whether this is better than competition/alternatives. Of course nobody is just going to take the output as is. If you do that, that's your problem.


79% win over OCR2 was just for English.

Right! I didn’t know the difference. Does it mean for 79 out of 100 documents they produce 100% accurate OCR, I doubt it. The win rate sounds like a practical approximation of accuracy here to me.

If I am wildly off, I am happy to learn.


79% of the time it beats the previous model.

The previous version already achieved up to 99% accuracy in multiple benchmarks, already better than most OCR software.


Thank you.

79 out of 100 documents Mistral OCR 3 provides better output than Mistral OCR 2.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: