What's New in Grooper 2026: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 10:41, 12 October 2026

2026 BETA

This article covers new or changed functionality in the current or upcoming beta version of Grooper. Features are subject to change before version 2026's GA release. Configuration and functionality may differ from later beta builds and the final 2026 release.

This is a placeholder for the Grooper 2026 release. Consider this a work in progress.

Grooper MCP

See full article linked below.

Grooper MCP

Action Schedulers

Known Upgrade Differences

Check here for known differences and issues to watch out for when upgrading to version 2026.

New .NET Libraries

In Grooper 2026, we upgraded the .NET version the platform is built on. This required us to change many of the libraries we use within the application. In most cases, this results in improved security and functionality.

However, using a different library can cause different results in some circumstances. Below you will find observed differences seen during testing.

New Tesseract OCR Library

If you are using the Tesseract OCR Engine, you may see slight differences in OCR results. In general, the results are improved overall. However, these differences did result in occasional reduction in field extraction when a regex or lexical based extractor was used in some of our regression tests. These minor differences weighed against improved results overall led us to leave the differences as is without additional development.

New fallback scoring mechanism for Auto Orient

The Auto Orient IP Command can use either Tesseract or Transym as the OCR Engine that evaluates page orientation. With the new Tesseract library, we saw differences in how Auto Orient rotated pages.

In many cases, Tesseract was less confident in its page orientation assessment when using an orientation-specific model. To address this, we added a fallback mechanism that uses a different model to determine orientation. If the initial orientation model produces a result below Auto Orient's confidence threshold, Tesseract runs a second pass with a different model. If the two passes agree on the orientation, the page is rotated. If they disagree, the page is not rotated.

This approach has pros and cons:

Pro: Auto Orient should be more accurate, even more so than before the change.
Con: The second pass takes additional time, which can slow down an IP Profile that uses Auto Orient. The more pages that require the second pass, the longer Auto Orient takes to execute.

Alternatives

If you want to avoid the secondary scoring mechanism, there are two alternatives:

Lower the "Minimum Confidence" value when Tesseract is selected. Auto Orient only runs the second pass when the first pass falls below the minimum confidence, so lowering the value means the second pass runs less often. However, a lower value can result in more false positives. Test any change to Minimum Confidence thoroughly to ensure good results.
Use Transym as the OCR Engine. We have not observed any differences in Transym's orientation results when it is used as Auto Orient's OCR Engine.

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 ==== New fallback scoring mechanism for Auto Orient ====
-The Auto Orient IP Command can use either Tesseract or Transym as the OCR Engine that evaluates page orientation. Because we have a new Tesseract library, we also saw differences in how Auto Orient rotated pages.
+The Auto Orient IP Command can use either Tesseract or Transym as the OCR Engine that evaluates page orientation. With the new Tesseract library, we saw differences in how Auto Orient rotated pages.
+In many cases, Tesseract was less confident in its page orientation assessment when using an orientation-specific model. To address this, we added a fallback mechanism that uses a different model to determine orientation. If the initial orientation model produces a result below Auto Orient's confidence threshold, Tesseract runs a second pass with a different model. If the two passes agree on the orientation, the page is rotated. If they disagree, the page is not rotated.
+This approach has pros and cons:
+* '''Pro:''' Auto Orient should be more accurate, even more so than before the change.
+* '''Con:''' The second pass takes additional time, which can slow down an IP Profile that uses Auto Orient. The more pages that require the second pass, the longer Auto Orient takes to execute.
-In many cases, Tesseract became less confident in its page orientation assessment. This led us to include a fallback mechanism that uses a different lexicon to determine orientation. If the initial pass produces an orientation below Auto Orient's confidence threshold, Tesseract will run a second pass with the different lexicon. If the two passes agree on the orientation, the page is rotated. If the two passes disagree, the page is not. This has pros and cons
-* PRO: This should make using Auto Orient more accurate, even than it was before the change.
-* CON: Running a second pass to determine orientation takes time. This will potentially slow down an IP Profile using Auto Orient. Furthermore, the more pages require the second pass, the more time it will take Auto Orient to execute.
 '''Alternatives'''
-If you want to avoid this secondary scoring mechanism, there are two alternatives:
-* Lower Auto Orient's "Minimum Confidence" value when Tesseract is selected - Because Auto Orient only runs this second orientation determining pass if the first pass falls below the minimum confidence, lowering the confidence will cause it to run the second pass less. However, lowering the confidence could result in more false positives. Be sure to test changes to a Minimum Confidence extensively to ensure good results.
+If you want to avoid the secondary scoring mechanism, there are two alternatives:
-* Use Transym as the OCR Engine - We have not observed any differences with Transym's orientation when it is used as Auto Orient's OCR Engine.
+* '''Lower the "Minimum Confidence" value when Tesseract is selected.''' Auto Orient only runs the second pass when the first pass falls below the minimum confidence, so lowering the value means the second pass runs less often. However, a lower value can result in more false positives. Test any change to Minimum Confidence thoroughly to ensure good results.
+* '''Use Transym as the OCR Engine.''' We have not observed any differences in Transym's orientation results when it is used as Auto Orient's OCR Engine.