Fable 5.1在文档解析任务上超越前代，但单独使用成本较高，每页15美分，比LlamaParse贵10-15倍。
Fable 5.1在ParseBench基准测试中表现优于前代Fable 5。ParseBench包含2000多份来自金融、法律、保险等领域的真实世界文档。Fable 5.1在表格忠实度、内容忠实度、格式、图表和视觉定位等指标上全面领先。它是近期少数在文档OCR性能上实现模型代际提升的前沿模型之一。
Fable 5.1 didn't come with document OCR benchmarks, so we benchmarked it on ParseBench: a comprehens...
Fable 5.1 didn't come with document OCR benchmarks, so we benchmarked it on ParseBench: a comprehensive parsing benchmark that's comprised of 2k+ real-world documents across finance, legal, insurance, and more. As a positive note, it is one of the first frontier models in recent memory where document OCR performance actually improved between model generations! ✅ It beats Fable 5 across the board on all of our metrics, from tables/content faithfulness/formatting/charts/visual grounding ✅ It is one of the best models out there for parsing tables This is great, because while frontier models have rapidly advanced on reasoning benchmarks, they have not advanced on visual understanding. Prior to this the latest models (Opus 5, 5.6-Sol, 3.7 Flash) have stagnated on visual understanding tasks. Obviously you shouldn't use Fable 5.1 as a document OCR tool on its own; besides missing needed metadata, it also costs 15c a page - which is 10-15x more expensive than our default agentic mode on LlamaParse (which performs similarly). If you're interested in tracking the 90+ solutions that we've benchmarked on doc OCR, check out ParseBench: parsebench.ai If you're looking for a dedicated, SOTA OCR tool to power your doc processing workloads, check out LlamaParse: cloud.llamaindex.ai 💬 3 🔄 0 ❤️ 6 👀 398 📊 4 ⚡