What's New in Grooper 2026: Difference between revisions
Dgreenwood (talk | contribs) |
Dgreenwood (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
== Action Schedulers == | == Action Schedulers == | ||
== | == Upgrade Notes for 2026 == | ||
Review these behavior changes we observed in testing before upgrading to version 2026. They may affect existing Projects, so we recommend testing your own documents after the upgrade. | |||
=== New .NET Libraries === | === New .NET Libraries === | ||
Grooper 2026 is built on a newer version of .NET. This required us to replace many of the libraries the platform uses. '''In most cases, this improves security and functionality.''' However, a different library can occasionally produce different results. The differences we observed in testing are listed below. | |||
==== Tesseract OCR ==== | |||
If you use the Tesseract OCR Engine, you may see slight differences in OCR results. Results are generally improved overall. However, in some of our regression tests, these differences occasionally reduced field extraction when a regex or lexicon-based Extractor was used. Because the overall improvement outweighed these minor differences, we chose not to make additional changes. | |||
If you | If you rely on regex or lexicon-based Extractors with Tesseract, retest them after upgrading. | ||
==== | ==== 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. | 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. | ||
Tesseract was often less confident in its page orientation assessment when using an orientation-specific model. To address this, we added a fallback mechanism. If the first pass 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 trade-offs: | |||
* '''Pro:''' Auto Orient should be more accurate than it was 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 run. | |||
'''Alternatives''' | '''Alternatives''' | ||
If you want to avoid the | If you want to avoid the second pass, you have two options: | ||
* '''Lower the "Minimum Confidence" value when Tesseract is selected.''' | * '''Lower the "Minimum Confidence" value when Tesseract is selected.''' The second pass only runs when the first pass falls below the minimum confidence, so a lower value means it runs less often. However, a lower value can also cause more false positives. Test any change thoroughly. | ||
* '''Use Transym as the OCR Engine.''' We have not observed any differences in Transym's orientation results | * '''Use Transym as the OCR Engine.''' We have not observed any differences in Transym's orientation results. | ||
Revision as of 10:45, 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.
Action Schedulers
Upgrade Notes for 2026
Review these behavior changes we observed in testing before upgrading to version 2026. They may affect existing Projects, so we recommend testing your own documents after the upgrade.
New .NET Libraries
Grooper 2026 is built on a newer version of .NET. This required us to replace many of the libraries the platform uses. In most cases, this improves security and functionality. However, a different library can occasionally produce different results. The differences we observed in testing are listed below.
Tesseract OCR
If you use the Tesseract OCR Engine, you may see slight differences in OCR results. Results are generally improved overall. However, in some of our regression tests, these differences occasionally reduced field extraction when a regex or lexicon-based Extractor was used. Because the overall improvement outweighed these minor differences, we chose not to make additional changes.
If you rely on regex or lexicon-based Extractors with Tesseract, retest them after upgrading.
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.
Tesseract was often less confident in its page orientation assessment when using an orientation-specific model. To address this, we added a fallback mechanism. If the first pass 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 trade-offs:
- Pro: Auto Orient should be more accurate than it was 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 run.
Alternatives
If you want to avoid the second pass, you have two options:
- Lower the "Minimum Confidence" value when Tesseract is selected. The second pass only runs when the first pass falls below the minimum confidence, so a lower value means it runs less often. However, a lower value can also cause more false positives. Test any change thoroughly.
- Use Transym as the OCR Engine. We have not observed any differences in Transym's orientation results.