UiPath Document Understanding Reviews

I used UiPath Document Understanding to create a report by reading invoices and V9 tax documents. I employed specific taxonomies to facilitate document analysis and populate my database with extracted information. The primary objective was to accurately identify and store relevant data from these documents within the database.

The idea arose from the observation that many companies lack a centralized repository for essential documents, such as invoices. In response, I created a website where a robot automatically uploads and interprets these invoices, presenting key details about each document on the website.

By using taxonomies, I could interpret the documents and make them easily accessible through a website database. This way, website visitors could find all the documents themselves, eliminating the need for them to repeatedly ask employees for specific documents like invoices or V9 tax forms. UiPath's visual processes further simplified this by allowing me to implement and manage the system effortlessly.

I used UiPath Document Understanding to process invoices and V9 tax documents.

All the documents processed were in PDF format.

The documents contain tables, boxes, check marks, and handwritten text.

All the documents were processed 100 percent automatically.

UiPath Document Understanding was able to handle the handwriting and signatures with no issues.

UiPath Document Understanding helped make the automation process easier for me.

The manual validation of each document took one second.

Using UiPath Document Understanding, all the documents were processed in just a minute. While I didn't have many documents, it still surprised me how quickly it worked. Manually, it would have taken me about five to ten minutes.

UiPath Document Understanding has saved me time to work on other projects in parallel.

The highly visual and user-friendly interface was a standout feature. Selecting taxonomies was as simple as clicking the corresponding areas on the invoices, enhancing the visual nature of the interaction.

UiPath Document Understanding requires more database connectors. I encountered difficulty connecting to Workbench from MySQL, necessitating a workaround.

I have been using UiPath Document Understanding for three months.

I did not face any stability issues with UiPath Document Understanding.

The scalability of UiPath Document Understanding is fine.

The initial deployment was straightforward. The deployment took a few minutes to complete and I did it myself.

Originally, I spent some time building the automation robot. However, once I completed it, I realized the value of UiPath Document Understanding.

I used the community version, so there was no fee.

I would rate UiPath Document Understanding nine out of ten.

I was the only one using the solution in our organization.

I recommend evaluating both the free and paid versions of UiPath Document Understanding. 

We use UiPath Document Understanding to process purchase orders and order confirmations.

We implemented UiPath Document Understanding because we wanted a more efficient way to process the documents we were receiving.

We process purchase orders and order confirmations in PDF format. The documents we process are tables and standard data.

We process anywhere from 150 to 200 documents per day with UiPath Document Understanding. We process between 60 to 70 percent of the documents completely with UiPath Document Understanding.

We do not use Document Understanding for signatures or handwriting, but we do use it for various document formats, which it handles moderately well.

The AI and machine learning with UiPath do the job moderately well.

We leveraged API calls to seamlessly integrate UiPath Document Understanding with other systems and applications within our environment.

UiPath Document Understanding has helped save us a lot of time.

We required human validation between 30 to 40 percent of the time.

Prior to implementing UiPath Document Understanding, it took us one hour to process each document. With the implementation, processing time has been reduced to one minute, saving us 59 minutes per document.

UiPath Document Understanding has helped reduce human error.

UiPath Document Understanding has helped save our people time to focus on other projects. This time savings is equivalent to the productive output of a full-time employee. 

I like the clear and organized way in which UiPath has structured the labeling process, as well as the user-friendly development environment.

Several areas require improvement in UiPath. The licensing model poses a significant challenge due to the fee charged for posting a model, which impedes the development of productivity-enhancing models. Additionally, UiPath's pricing is substantially higher than that of its competitors, approximately three to four times higher.

UiPath's AI quality needs substantial improvement. Several issues have persisted for at least two years, such as the inability to handle breaks in tables. When data in a table extends from the first page to the second, UiPath fails to process it effectively. Additionally, UiPath struggles to handle multiple items.

I have been using UiPath Document Understanding for over two years.

I would rate the stability of UiPath Document Understandings six out of ten, because of the AI issues.

I would rate the scalability of UiPath Document Understanding eight out of ten.

The technical support is good.

Positive

The initial deployment is straightforward. We implemented a hybrid model of on-premises and cloud deployment throughout the organization. The robots are physically located on-premises, but their operations are managed and controlled through a cloud-based platform. One person was required for the deployment.

We have seen a return on investment with UiPath Document Understanding.

UiPath Document Understanding compared to the competitors is high. I would rate the price nine out of ten with ten being the most expensive.

I would rate UiPath Document Understanding seven out of ten.

We have seen time to value with UiPath Document Understanding.

UiPath Document Understanding requires constant maintenance because of the AI issues. One person can handle the maintenance.

I recommend thoroughly testing UiPath Document Understanding to verify that the organization is genuinely deriving value from the tool and to assess whether the AI model can effectively handle the capabilities advertised by UiPath.

The product is very, very nice. The tool relieves the data entry team from manipulating data. It shortens the time of extracting data by 70 to 80%.

UiPath should localize the built-in features for supporting Arabic scripts so we do not rely on third-party tools. It will take some investment. Sometimes, when we use third-party tools, we need to collect multiple samples of the same document in Arabic. It creates some errors in understanding. 

Sometimes, we need to do multiple formats for the same document. It happens due to the nature of the Arabic language. For the same document in English, we only supply one template. The output of handwritten documents in Arabic is very poor, regardless of the solution. For computer-printed documents, we need to tune the system.

I am using the solution currently.

The product is stable.

The tool is scalable.

We were using our own intelligent business processing solution. It is more convenient to use because it's our own product, and we rely on Amazon Web Services. It provides big advantages for Arabic scripts. It is more understandable.

The product is easy to implement to an extent. If we are familiar with the input, processing, output, and how to declare variables, it's easy. If we are new to UiPath, it would be somewhat difficult to understand. UiPath Academy and certifications are very important.

The difficulties in implementation depend on the environments, document sources, document types, and customer understanding. Sometimes, customers think the product can pass anything without configuration, which is not true in some cases. We have to be very clear with the customer about the type of documents and layout they can expect. Two working days are sufficient for configuring, extracting, and linking the process. One person is enough to deploy the solution.

The pricing depends on the context of the project. UiPath is a pricey tool for small customers. If the customer agrees on the cloud product, we discuss the cost accordingly. In some cases, even though the customer sees value in the product, return on investment, productivity, and enhancements of their processes, they decide not to choose UiPath due to budget constraints. They choose a different vendor.

Sometimes, the customer is small, but we could see the potential for using the tool because they might have multiple processes. The price we offer is based on the context and the size of the opportunity we get for references. Document Understanding has helped us automate processes like contract management, reconciliation of invoices against purchase orders, claims management, and HR processes.

We process 100,000 to 500,000 documents in a year. We also had a project for Dubai Customs to reconcile the customs clearance, which involved 500,000 to 1,000,000 documents. These documents contain tables, bar codes, dates, and checkboxes. Tables might span over multiple pages, and we must capture it completely. It becomes challenging sometimes. If there is an invoice of three pages, everything must be captured, but sometimes the values are inaccurate.

Around 70% of our organization’s documents are completely processed automatically. We haven't used the product for signatures. Customers often see from a productivity point of view. If their employees process ten documents an hour, and the tool processes 50 documents an hour, using the tool is an advantage for them.

The tool does not work for integrations. It extracts data. When we extract data successfully, we rely on other business tools for integration. Document Understanding serves as a first milestone in the process. The tool at the second milestone would pick up the extracted data and post it according to the processes or applications used.

We need human validation of Document Understanding outputs three out of ten times. It does not take more than 20 to 30 seconds per document. An employee would take ten documents per minute. RPA could handle 30 to 40 documents per minute. Document Understanding has helped us reduce human errors by 70% to 80%.

Document Understanding has helped free up staff’s time for other projects. From a development point of view, it has freed up 70% of staff's time. From an employee's point of view, it has freed up 80 to 90% of their time. We saw the value of the product after a couple of projects, especially when we implemented it and saw the value for ourselves. As a customer, vendor, or implementer, when we see the execution, we see the value.

If someone wants to take advantage of this technology, they must think multiple times about different scenarios. They must centralize the capture or the source of data. They can use any product that is easy to use and configure and link it to the processes. They must sync the templates and the configuration multiple times and link it to the automation strategy.

Overall, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

We use UiPath to automate invoice generation in our manufacturing process. One large project I worked on was for electricity bill payments. This project involved document processing, and I gained some experience with document processing and process mining. From there, we started using UiPath Document Understanding for the bulk of invoices we were receiving. We then had to put those invoices into the document processing model because they had a uniform structure, but there were also some handwritten notes and values in different places. So, we had to opt for document processing. Right now, we are developing a proof of concept for one of our government websites. This involves tender documents. We download and process the tender documents, extracting data such as the quotation, validity period, and other details, and putting it into a database.

We are processing documents in the hundreds using UiPath Document Understanding.

The standard document contains header information such as the company name, quoted value, quotation price, and expiration date. There are also tabular details regarding the items to be delivered. The tabular structure has headers, but checkboxes are not present in this particular use case. In addition to the header and tabular details, the document may also contain handwritten notes.

We have deployed UiPath Document Understanding on-premises but given the choice we always recommend the cloud because it includes more features.

UiPath Document Understanding eliminated the manual process of extracting data from 50 different websites each day.

Our customers' documents vary by website, but their structure is fairly uniform. As a result, we were able to process approximately 70-75 percent of the documents automatically with very good accuracy.

UiPath Document Understanding can identify and export signatures and handwriting from clear documents, using machine learning.

AI and machine learning feed the unprocessed raw data to some of the custom machine learning models. I have been working as a backend developer, so I have experience with machine learning as well. I tried with some of my own models, and it was clear that the customization of these models to our specific data requirements is very impressive.

UiPath Document Understanding's ability to integrate with all the systems and applications in our environment depends on the specific requirements of our use case. If it is generating a good return on investment, then I will consider using it for document processing. However, if my requirements can be met without using document processing, I will definitely choose to use simple OCR techniques instead. Traditional OCR engines can extract data from documents and place it into databases, where it can then be manipulated. However, this approach can be time-consuming and error-prone.

UiPath Document Understanding has helped our organization improve. It is especially useful when there is ambiguity in documents, which is a common real-life scenario. Inbuilt OCR engines are often unable to perform data inspection accurately in such cases. Whenever we have a large volume of documents to process and need to ensure high accuracy, UiPath Document Understanding is our first choice. One of the key benefits of UiPath Document Understanding is that it provides a dedicated model for document processing. This means that developers do not need to worry about other details and can focus solely on the task at hand. Additionally, UiPath Document Understanding integrates seamlessly with machine learning and AI models, which further enhances its capabilities.

Some of our customers were reluctant to switch over, and for a long time, they did everything manually, so their documentation was very outdated. As a result, we were required to manually validate 30 percent of the documents. The time to manually validate depends on each document. If two or three fields are mismatched, it does not take much time to correct them. However, if the entire document is showing errors, that will add time to the manual validation process.

It reduces the risk of human error and the time we spend processing documentation, freeing up our staff to work on other projects.

OCR technology is undoubtedly the most valuable feature and the feasibility of integrating data processes with AI and machine learning models is fascinating.

The identification and extraction of signatures is the most difficult part of the process, and there is room for improvement.

The machine learning model needs improvement, as we receive more and more unstructured documents from clients that require a lot of manual validation.

I have been using UiPath Document Understanding for three years.

UiPath Document Understanding is stable.

UiPath Document Understanding is scalable.

I've seen many clients refuse to purchase the licensing when they see the pricing. They're quite impressed with the results, as the bot does so much work in less time with accuracy. However, when it comes to pricing, I've seen clients refuse to spend that much on the licensing cost for UiPath Document Understanding.

On a scale of one to ten with ten being the most expensive, I rate UiPath Document Understanding an eight on cost.

I would rate UiPath Document Understanding eight out of ten.

I definitely recommend UiPath Document Understanding to anyone who is trying to do any kind of document automation. In fact, I have some friends who are working on an RPA project using UiPath, and we have been discussing it. I recommended Document Understanding when it first came out, and I think they have been using it for the project.

We use the solution in pharmacy health care, and our role is to enable doctors so that they can set up a personalized clinic - everything a patient requires. We get information in the form of a document and we can break it down into sheets and JSON files, for example. We use a UiPath documentation tool. 

Document understanding has helped us increase our efficiency and accuracy. We don't have to manually check data again and again. 

After the first month, we discussed how the solution was benefiting us, and we decided to continue with it.

It helps with data and consistency. It helps us receive information and convert it so the systems we have in place can understand a problem and generate responses accordingly.

We've used it in one process where we received a patient's pharmaceutical documents from other sources that come in different formats. We receive the formats, convert the information into a standard format, and then process the information to provide information for insurance forms. 

The average document size is not very large, likely 80-100 MBs. However, the total count of the patients is somewhere around 10,000. 

We have 50% to 60% of clients directly onboarded via an insurance form. Therefore, we are provided with the exact form we need and can run a complete automation on that. There's no type of manual involvement there. 

The format for setup is a great thing. Earlier, the tool that we used was pretty manual. In this case, it's a bit easier for our developers.

The solution can detect signatures to let us know that there's a signature there. You can construct tables or any other format of data based on pure text information. 

They are employing an ML model for detection conversations. They are also trying to deploy a written-to-text conversion. They are convinced AMR systems will replace other manual work.

The main value of AI for us is to convert data formats from one type to another. We receive data stating two or more complex data points mixed later, for example, the license number and the serial date of operation for the doctors or the patient code; sometimes these things are mixed together. We want all those to be arranged. Their AI does the job very well.

We can integrate document understanding with other systems and applications. With it, we can simply write down a code to communicate with the ML model, for example, how to convert the data and which datasets to look for precisely in the documentation. We were able to communicate easily what would be the format of the PDF documents that we would be providing. The integration part and communication was the best aspect of the entire application.

We have Veracode integrated with it. We will do a manual check if we get a security flag where the data may be inconsistent. We usually get an alert like this once or twice a week. The human validation process usually takes an hour since we have to manually check the parameters. Before implementing the solution, the handling time before automating the process was pretty much the same. With this, we may have reduced it by half an hour. Also, previously, we'd have more manual interventions happening, maybe three or four times a day; however, now, with everything automated, that only happens one or two times a week. It's reduced the frequency by about half an hour on average. 

Using the solution has freed up staff time. We've reduced our team size in regards to quality checking. We've reduced the amount of work by 40 to 50 hours a week. 

UiPath's documentation tool is not great with converting handwriting to text, so we only used it for the conversion of insurance documents into other formats.

They could modulate the ML model in the future. When it comes to working with data and processing reports, we have to target the datasets we had earlier targeted and redefine the parameters, which takes a lot of time. If the ML model, at the time it is analyzing the data, could in itself provide the insights we will need for future reporting, that would be great. There needs to be better real-time analytics since we aren't getting the data for reporting until we go and seek it out. 

If there were more integrations with Veracode or the AWS server, so we don't have to completely transfer our data and keep data on our servers, that might increase security. 

I've used the solution for a year or so. 

The solution is good. It's very stable.

It's not deployed across multiple departments. We have this deployed across one department. We have two developers working with the stream of data. 

For small to medium firms, the solution scales well. However, if you are going for a global scale, you should develop your own models and not rely on outside models. 

Support is good. That said, sometimes they have problems understanding what we want to do with the data since we cannot provide the data in its raw format. We have to decrypt it. This makes it a bit harder. That's why we would like integration on our servers instead of theirs. 

Positive

We did use a different solution previously. We switched since the number of tags we were getting was pretty high. We had to do more manual interventions a lot more often. The parameters we used to communicate were also manual. It required setting up a decision tree in the whole of the document. A lot of the time, we would not know what the document type would look like. It required the developers to look at the documents, create a decision tree, and go from there. With UiPath, we don't need to do all that manual upfront work. 

I was a project manager, not a developer, deploying the solution. My understanding is the process was moderate. It was eight too easy or too complex. 

The implementation involved discussing the work with the insurance firm. We explained we were moving from one system to another. Once we had that conversation, we received the documentation in the format we wanted. 

Then, we looked at how we encrypted our data before sending it to UiPath servers. We did have a lot of compliance issues and had to be careful. 

Once we came to the physical implementation, that was easy. Managing other stakeholders and their clients was the hardest part.

We had three developers from our team working on the deployment. It took us about 10 to 11 days to deploy.

Twice a week, maintenance is needed whenever there's a flag raised when data points do not match. We can simply ignore the solution and change the data file, or we can go in and see what is wrong with the file type and adjust it so that it doesn't happen again. 

We did not use any outside assistance beyond the help of UiPath's support team. 

The ROI is pretty good. We did not do any calculation for ROI. However, the accuracy percentage and time reduction which we noted, have made us happy.

We originally noticed a time to value for UiPath within 10 to 12 days.

The pricing is pretty fair. It is quote-based. Overall, it's fair. If you are a small firm looking to scale up, it is good. Enterprises should create their own ML model instead of relying on some outside product.

We looked at a few other options and did a few POCs. UiPath is able to sense and analyze a document and create a hierarchy for you. You can also create a manual code if you want something done differently. The only issue is we have to upload the information to UiPath servers, which may be a security issue. 

We're end-users, not integrators. 

It's a good idea to have a call with the support team and managers and do a review to understand the solution to see if the product would work with your type of data. It's important to test it out, ideally using your own data. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We implemented UiPath Document Understanding for our first project with a pharmaceutical insurance company. They were receiving invoices from over 2,000 different vendors in a variety of formats on a daily basis, and they wanted to automate the process. We are receiving invoices in their email, and we are automating the download and processing of these invoices. If the confidence level of the automated data extraction is low, a user or client can correct the data according to the invoice and then submit it. The data will then be improved. We will be automating this project in two parts: first, reading specific emails and downloading the attachments; and second, checking if the attachments are normal documents or invoices.

We have implemented UiPath Document Understanding for two companies: one in the insurance industry and the other in the financial industry. We have completed the document creation process, which includes OCR and automatic signature imposition by different lawyers on the finalized documentation. We also use Document Understanding to read the document after analyzing it, and we then update the PDF with a front page signature and other components. This is a small process, but the first project was very large and we gained a lot of business from it. It was a very good project overall.

We process between 100 to 200 documents per day using Document Understanding.

The documents include checkboxes and barcodes. Some of our vendors only provide handwritten invoices, which Document Understanding could not read. These invoices had to be processed manually by the user.

UiPath Document Understanding can handle varying document formats including handwritten documents.

We have implemented a machine learning model to sort vendor names and important information related to those vendors into our system. When the model encounters a vendor that it has already seen, it automatically grabs the important information from the invoice. The model is continuously training on the new data that it receives, so it can become more accurate over time.

Machine learning was very good. We don't think we can implement without any ML model.

We integrated Document Understanding with Dynamic CRM so that the information extracted by Document Understanding is automatically input into CRM.

The amount of human validation required is based on the confidence level of the ML model. Each time human validation is required, the ML model learns and the need for human validation decreases. At the start, the ratio of documents requiring human validation was 50/50, but this ratio decreased with each iteration.

Document understanding helps reduce human errors. For example, if we receive 150 emails daily, we must analyze and process each email accordingly, such as sending invoices, checking invoice values, and investigating all relevant information. We must then read each invoice and enter the data into the system. This is a very active task that requires around 15 people to perform daily. Document understanding has reduced the need for human interaction by allowing us to automate this process. Now, only one person needs to analyze the email invoices. Once the invoices have been checked and analyzed, they are passed to a UiPath bot, which handles all the subsequent steps, such as reading the invoices and entering the data into the system.

Document understanding has helped free up staff time.

UiPath provides a useful feature that allows us to classify documents as invoices or not.

If the confidence level is low, we can check it and provide the product value to move forward. In this step, the user can sometimes skip or delete pages, especially if we receive a large PDF with the first two pages being invoices, followed by some relevant documents, and then more invoices in the same period. This is a very good feature of UiPath Document Understanding, as it allows the user to skip pages within the PDF document to move forward. For example, the user can specify that the first two pages and pages nine and ten are invoices.

UiPath Document Understanding's ability to read handwritten files has room for improvement.

The price of Document understanding is high, and we are constantly struggling to get our clients to use it because they find it to be expensive.

I have been using UiPath Document Understanding for one and a half years.

UiPath Document Understanding is stable. We have not encountered any downtime.

UiPath Document Understanding is scalable.

The technical support was helpful.

Positive

The initial deployment was straightforward.

Two people were required for deployment.

The implementation was completed in-house. We have a large team that includes technical consultants, architects, and developers.

The last time we implemented UiPath Document Understanding the price was high.

I would rate UiPath Document Understanding six out of ten.

I am working with Mercedes teams from Germany. They have many handwritten documents in their archive, and they wanted to digitize them. Maybe we want to digitize them with UiPath Document Understanding tool, but it is not now. Maybe next year. Most of the document types are invoices. 

Our robots will integrate these documents with SAP because these invoices have to be in SAP. The process involves OCRing the documents, sending an email to the business units, and integrating with SAP. I prepared one framework for these tasks.

Using UiPath Document Understanding helps increase the data correction rate. For example, for one document, one business unit spends an average of five to six minutes, however, our robot does it in about 30 to 40 seconds.

The UiPath Document Understanding tool is very easy to use for document understanding. I like it for its ease of use. 

AI Hub is also useful and easy to use. Creating taxonomy and clarifications from labels is straightforward. 

The integration with UiPath Studio is smooth, making it easy to create and use machine learning models.

Right now, we are trying to use Instabase, which is another tool for document understanding. It may be one one step ahead. It is faster than UiPath.

We are currently trying to use Instabase for document understanding. We have not observed stability issues with UiPath Document Understanding so far.

We have technical support with UiPath Turkey team. Sometimes they come to our office and prepare some POCs with UiPath tools. I would rate them nine out of ten.

Positive

The implementation team sometimes visits our office to assist with POCs and provides support for UiPath tools.

Our data correction rate increased to 80% with the implementation of UiPath solutions.

I am not aware of the pricing details. My manager handles that, and as far as I know, Instabase is more expensive.

We are trying to use Instabase as an alternate solution to UiPath Document Understanding.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our client has PDF invoices and we use the solution to extract the details from them. We are using it in finance and health care. We have about 16 templates that we process now. The data is in semi-structured format and we mostly process things like signatures and tables. Out of the 16 templates, about 12 are completely processed automatically.

It has helped us automate finance statements and invoice billings.

Another benefit is that it has mostly helped reduce human error. We have a criteria of 75 percent matching. Out of 10 PDFs we have been getting eight PDFs with at least 75 percent matches. It has also helped free up staff time.

The taxonomy and Validation Station are among the most helpful features for us. If anything is extracted incorrectly, we can manually extract it there.

And we have included the AI Center for our customers to interact with PDFs to be extracted. Based on the approval or rejection feature, our customer can determine which kinds of PDFs they can automate.

I also like the table extraction feature. UiPath is very good with structured data.

Handwriting is more complex. We have not been able to get handwritten signatures correctly extracted in different languages. Our customer is in Dubai, and the solution cannot accurately process signatures in the local language. But it is a great tool for handling structured and semi-structured formats.

Another of the disadvantages is that we cannot include another tool. For example, with ABBYY extraction, we can integrate the process with any other product. We can integrate Document Understanding using JSON templates, but it is a bit of a complex model to extract the data from the JSON.

There is also room for improvement in long-running table extraction. If a table continues for more than 10 pages, in some cases, we have observed that it only extracts six or seven pages and skips the last pages.

I have been using UiPath for about 10 years.

Overall, the product is stable.

In our case, the use of Document Understanding is restricted to a particular group of users, around six or seven people.

The technical support from UiPath has been pretty good in the last year. It has been a very good experience. 

We used Azure DevOps for the deployment and we faced some issues regarding the deployment with UiPath and Orchestrator. We had a very good response from the UiPath technical team.

There is some room for them to improve the speed of the response because we often used to get late responses. But the resolutions are good.

Positive

We were using ABBYY, but it is more like a developer's tool with everything a developer needs for extracting fields. But we can train and retrain Document Understanding. In that way, I feel it's a better tool.

The pricing is reasonable.

As for additional costs, the solution is based on OCR, and sometimes the OCR cap is exceeded. It's not a major cost. Per month, we will have two or three scenarios like that. With ABBYY, once the cap was reached, we had to wait until the next day to use it again.

We did not evaluate other solutions. Using Document Understanding was a requirement from the client's side.

In terms of human validation for Document Understanding output, we have a limit of 75 percent correct scenarios. If it is below 75 percent, the user will be notified.

The solution doesn't require any maintenance unless the client requires more fields to be extracted. Only then are there changes that I need to make.

My advice is that if you are starting to learn about Document Understanding, you need to learn more about the taxonomy and what fields you are extracting. You need to have clarity on which position you are extracting, as it mostly depends on the position.