Locating Failure in Multi-Page Visually Rich Document Understanding: An Empirical Attribution
Authors: Lewei Xu, Yihao Ding, Zihan Xu, Daniel Yitian Su, Daochang Liu, Siwen Luo, Yifan Peng, Wei Liu
Abstract
Multi-page visually-rich document understanding (MP-VRDU) requires managing evidence that is sparse, spread across pages, and often exceeds a model's context window. Prior work has produced competing, largely untested claims about how these systems should be built. We attribute incorrect answers to three failure modes, representation, selection, and reasoning, and isolate each over a multi-page document understanding dataset by intervening on one while holding the others fixed. We find that vision is necessary but does not replace text extraction, that missing pages bound accuracy while distractors cost little, and that reasoners fail to integrate evidence across pages even when it is fully supplied. Prompting can shift reasoning behaviour substantially, improving some outcomes at the expense of others. We translate these findings into guidance for building such systems under a fixed compute budget.
Evaluating whether Multimodal Large Language Models can produce trustworthy, verifiable reasoning over long, visually rich documents requires evaluation beyond end-to-end answer accuracy. We introduce DocScope, a benchmark that formulates long-document QA as a structured reasoning trajectory prediction problem: given a complete PDF document and a question, the model outputs evidence pages, supporting evidence regions, relevant factual statements, and a final answer. We design a four-stage evaluation protocol -- Page Localization, Region Grounding, Fact Extraction, and Answer Verification -- that audits each level of the trajectory independently through inter-stage decoupling, with all judges selected and calibrated via human alignment studies. DocScope comprises 1,124 questions derived from 273 documents, with all hierarchical evidence annotations completed by human annotators. We benchmark 6 proprietary models, 12 open-weight models, and several domain-specific systems. Our experiments reveal that answer accuracy cannot substitute for trajectory-level evaluation: even among correct answers, the highest observed rate of complete evidence chains is only 29%. Across all models, region grounding remains the weakest trajectory stage. Furthermore, the primary difficulty stems from aggregating evidence dispersed across long distances and multiple document clusters, while an oracle study identifies faithful perception and fact extraction as the dominant capability bottleneck. Cross-architecture comparisons further suggest that activated parameter count matters more than total scale. The benchmark and code will be publicly released at https://github.com/MiliLab/DocScope.
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) streamlines long-document understanding by leveraging retrieval mechanisms to restrict input images to a highly curated subset. However, existing multimodal RAG pipelines primarily face two critical challenges: first, standard semantic similarity retrievers frequently fetch topically overlapping yet answer-void distractor pages that mislead downstream generation; second, rigid single-pass pipelines heavily depend on initial retrieval success, where any omission of core evidence inevitably causes cascading errors. To address these challenges, we introduce HIEVI-RAG, a hierarchical, evidence-driven multimodal RAG framework for closed-domain document understanding. HIEVI-RAG systematically factorizes complex queries into a cooperative four-stage pipeline: (1) hierarchical question decomposition to break multi-hop root queries into atomic child questions; (2) coarse visual page retrieval leveraging a multimodal retriever to fetch candidate pages based on semantic similarity; (3) fine-grained page verification via EVIAGENT, a specialized multi-page verifier trained with GRPO to execute cross-page reasoning over multi-image blocks; and (4) memory-guided iterative generation that leverages accumulated sub-question context to execute multi-round, dynamic reasoning over the prioritized sequence. Extensive evaluations across four benchmarks demonstrate the robust efficacy and synergy of our framework, which significantly outperforms existing open-source baselines and exceeds the strongest reported baseline by an average of 8.05% in accuracy.
Multi-page document visual question answering requires locating sparse evidence at both the page and region levels. Existing approaches typically emphasize one level over the other: page-centric methods focus on page acquisition, with region operations serving mainly as navigation aids, whereas region-centric methods assume that the relevant pages have already been supplied. Consequently, page and region selection remain disconnected rather than forming successive evidence decisions. We propose HierDoc, a hierarchical evidence-routing framework that formulates long-document evidence acquisition as two-stage set prediction from pages to regions. A page policy selects evidence pages from the full document; these pages are then parsed for semantic elements, after which a region policy selects the elements passed to a downstream answer model. Both answer-agnostic policies are optimized with stage-wise GRPO using granularity-specific structured-set rewards. The answer model receives selected full pages together with selected region crops and OCR or table text, preserving global context while emphasizing fine-grained evidence. Across the evaluated benchmarks, HierDoc achieves state-of-the-art or competitive performance among open-weight systems, improving LongDocURL by 16.87% relative to the strongest reported open-weight baseline. Controlled ablations further show that selected regional evidence improves the page-only system in accuracy and F1 by 5.51% and 4.82%, respectively. These results demonstrate the benefit of organizing coarse page routing and fine-grained region routing as successive, separately optimized stages of a unified evidence-acquisition process.