aiqbench analysis
This study establishes the first systematic evaluation of Large Language Models for post-OCR correction in Devanagari scripts, revealing that retrieval strategy and model scale are decisive factors in performance. The proposed CharBM25 method, which uses character n-gram similarity, significantly outperforms random selection and dense semantic retrieval while remaining computationally efficient without requiring GPU resources. Crucially, the research demonstrates that models below 8B parameters often fail to improve upon baseline OCR results for these complex languages, highlighting a clear capacity threshold for reliable deployment.
Evaluating In-Context Learning and Retrieval Strategies for Devanagari Post-OCR Correction
arXiv:2609.21595v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In-context learning using Large Language Models (LLMs) offers a compelling path to training-free post-OCR correction, yet its effectiveness for Devanagari script remains entirely unexplored. We present the first systematic evaluation of LLMs (3B-32B) for post-OCR correction in Hindi and Marathi, comparing three in-context example retrieval strategies: domain-random selection, dense semantic retrieval, and our proposed CharBM25, which retrieves examples by character n-gram BM25 similarity over OCR inputs to target shared error patterns with the test sentence. Across a 20,000-sentence benchmark spanning five news domains, retrieval strategy is the decisive factor in correction quality: CharBM25 outperforms domain-random selection by 2.8-4.0pp absolute WER on Hindi and 2.9-3.8pp on Marathi, using character trigrams, which consistently outperform bigrams and unigrams. Scale dominates performance: Gemma-3-27B achieves WER reductions of 55.0% for Hindi and 33.3% for Marathi under CharBM25-5. Few-shot gains are capacity-gated: models below 8B do not reliably improve over the OCR baseline, and on Marathi the smallest models (3B) degrade more sentences than they improve. Marathi is persistently harder to correct than Hindi across all scales, reflecting its greater morphological complexity. These findings establish CharBM25 as an effective, GPU-free retrieval strategy that matches or exceeds dense retrieval at negligible computational cost, and show that combining it with a general-purpose LLM of 12B+ parameters delivers reliable, training-free Devanagari post-OCR correction without task-specific fine-tuning. Dataset: https://huggingface.co/datasets/AbhishekBhandari/Devanagari-OCR-ICL-Benchmark
Abstract:In-context learning using Large Language Models (LLMs) offers a compelling path to training-free post-OCR correction, yet its effectiveness for Devanagari script remains entirely unexplored. We present the first systematic evaluation of LLMs (3B-32B) for post-OCR correction in Hindi and Marathi, comparing three in-context example retrieval strategies: domain-random selection, dense semantic retrieval, and our proposed CharBM25, which retrieves examples by character n-gram BM25 similarity over OCR inputs to target shared error patterns with the test sentence. Across a 20,000-sentence benchmark spanning five news domains, retrieval strategy is the decisive factor in correction quality: CharBM25 outperforms domain-random selection by 2.8-4.0pp absolute WER on Hindi and 2.9-3.8pp on Marathi, using character trigrams, which consistently outperform bigrams and unigrams. Scale dominates performance: Gemma-3-27B achieves WER reductions of 55.0% for Hindi and 33.3% for Marathi under CharBM25-5. Few-shot gains are capacity-gated: models below 8B do not reliably improve over the OCR baseline, and on Marathi the smallest models (3B) degrade more sentences than they improve. Marathi is persistently harder to correct than Hindi across all scales, reflecting its greater morphological complexity. These findings establish CharBM25 as an effective, GPU-free retrieval strategy that matches or exceeds dense retrieval at negligible computational cost, and show that combining it with a general-purpose LLM of 12B+ parameters delivers reliable, training-free Devanagari post-OCR correction without task-specific fine-tuning. Dataset: this https URL
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV)
arXiv:2609.21595 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2609.21595v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.21595 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 322 words
Related coverage

Building trust in AI agents: A production-ready evaluation framework with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore
AWS · Oct 16, 2026

AgentOps: Operationalize agentic AI at scale with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore
AWS · Jun 1, 2026

The generative AI customization spectrum: From prompt engineering to custom models on AWS
AWS · Sep 14, 2026
What's Continual Learning, and Why Might We Expect To See It In Advanced LLM Agents?
LessWrong · Jun 12, 2026