Can Structural Cues Save LLMs? Evaluating Language Models in Massive Document Streams

We present LLMStructBench, a novel benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on extracting structured data and generating valid JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) outputs from natural-language text. Our open dataset comprises diverse, manually verified parsing scenarios of varying complexity and enables systematic testing across 22 models and five prompting strategies. We further introduce complementary performance metrics that capture both token-level accuracy and document-level validity, facilitating rigorous comparison of model, size, and prompting effects on parsing reliability. In particular, we show that choosing the right prompting strategy is more important than standard attributes such as model size. This especially ensures structural validity for smaller or less reliable models but increase the number of semantic errors. Our benchmark suite is an step towards future research in the area of LLM applied to parsing or Extract, Transform and Load (ETL) applications.

Large language models (LLMs) are widely used for open-ended tasks, but underspecified prompts can lead to low-quality answers and additional interaction. This paper studies whether structured prompt design improves response quality while reducing user effort. We compare three prompt conditions: a raw prompt, a checklist-improved prompt, and a clarifying-question prompt. We evaluate these conditions across four task types--summarization, planning, explanation, and coding--using three LLM systems: ChatGPT, Claude, and Grok. Each output is scored with a unified rubric covering task completion, correctness, compliance, and clarity. Checklist-improved prompts achieved the highest mean rubric score, 7.50 out of 8, compared with 5.67 for raw prompts and 6.67 for clarifying-question prompts. Checklist prompts also produced the best quality-effort tradeoff, using fewer average tokens than both raw and clarifying prompts. These results suggest that a simple prompt checklist can improve LLM responses while reducing unnecessary interaction.

Large language models (LLMs) are widely applied to data analytics over documents, yet direct reasoning over long, noisy documents remains brittle and error-prone. Hence, we study document question answering (QA) that consolidates dispersed evidence into a structured output (e.g., a table, graph, or chunks) to support reliable, verifiable QA. We propose a two-pillar framework, LiteCoST, to achieve both high accuracy and low latency with small language models (SLMs). Pillar 1: Chain-of-Structured-Thought (CoST). We introduce a CoST template, a schema-aware instruction that guides a strong LLM to produce both a step-wise CoST trace and the corresponding structured output. The process induces a minimal structure, normalizes entities/units, aligns records, serializes the output, and verifies/refines it, yielding auditable supervision. Pillar 2: SLM fine-tuning. The compact models are trained on LLM-generated CoST data in two stages: Supervised Fine-Tuning for structural alignment, followed by Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) incorporating triple rewards for answer/format quality and process consistency. By distilling structure-first behavior into SLMs, this approach achieves LLM-comparable quality on multi-domain long-document QA using 3B/7B SLMs, while delivering 2-4x lower latency than GPT-4o and DeepSeek-R1 (671B). The code is available at https://github.com/HKUSTDial/LiteCoST.