SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2608.28635

Do MLLMs Really Understand Low-Resource Khmer Documents? A Pilot Study on Khmer Document VQA

Abstract

Recent multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have advanced document understanding, visual question answering, and text extraction. However, their reliability in low-resource, non-Latin settings remains uncertain. Khmer form documents present particular challenges because they contain complex script forms, mixed Khmer-English fields, and monetary values in both Cambodian Riel and US Dollars. Available resources for Khmer Document VQA are also limited. This paper presents a pilot diagnostic evaluation of open MLLMs on Khmer document images. We construct an evaluation subset from the previously introduced KH-FUNSD collection, covering invoices, receipts, quotations, and other business forms. The subset includes questions in English and Khmer, with answers retained in their original English, Khmer, mixed-script, or numeric forms. Rather than introducing a full public benchmark, this study examines the capabilities and failure modes of existing models. We evaluate representative open Qwen-VL models using direct image-based prompting and compare parser-assisted and external OCR-assisted configurations with Qwen3-VL-8B. Direct Qwen3-VL-8B outperforms smaller models, achieving 51.9% overall accuracy, although performance remains limited for Khmer-script and mixed-script answers. External OCR produces the strongest results, reaching 61.9% with Tesseract and 61.6% with PaddleOCR. Nevertheless, Khmer-script answers remain substantially more difficult than English and numeric fields. The results indicate that current MLLMs can process visually clear English and structured numeric content, but reliable native Khmer document understanding remains an open challenge.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Nimol Thuon, Panhapin Theang. 2026-08-08. Do MLLMs Really Understand Low-Resource Khmer Documents? A Pilot Study on Khmer Document VQA. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28635

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related discoveries

When Robots Mishear Us: Mapping the Safety Risks of Voice-Controlled Embodied AI

We investigate whether automatic speech recognition (ASR) errors in user input can lead to unsafe outputs from Embodied AI (EAI) models. We find that ASR errors can lead to harmful instructions being accepted and executed by EAI models, thereby reducing safety. We simulate ASR errors and combine them with existing safety benchmarks (SafeAgentBench and POEX) to evaluate how different errors affect embodied AI safety. We find that some of them preserve semantic structure but increase harmful ambiguity, while others weaken the model refusal behaviour and allow unsafe plans to be generated and executed. We show that in some cases automatic correction of ASR errors can reduce the risk, but this is not always effective. Overall, we show that ASR errors lead to significant safety risks for embodied AI.

cs.AI

Sleight of Word Benchmark: Can Language Models Notice If Their Own Output Was Tampered With?

The output of a Language Model can be tampered with \emph{while} the model is writing it. A simple test can thus be constructed by evaluating the model's perception of this external perturbation. In this spirit, a simple benchmark is built in which a single word is consistently substituted with another in the generation process. We call this method \emph{Sleight of Word}. Two distinct axes are measured: metrics that relate to the model's surprise, as well as an evaluation of the textual reaction for 19 different open-weight language models.

cs.CL

TCS-BENCH: Benchmarking State-of-the-Art Generative AI Theoretical Computer Science Research Ability

We introduce TCS-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on research-level Theoretical Computer Science (TCS) proof generation. TCS-Bench consists of theorem-proving tasks from papers published at top theoretical computer science venues (STOC, FOCS, and SODA). Each task provides the necessary context to derive a self-contained proof for a target result. We evaluate state-of-the-art models on this benchmark. We verify the correctness of generated proofs via a verification agent, and further benchmark the verifier against human-expert proof judgements on a set of target statements and generated proofs pairs. Our reference verifier achieves over 90% accuracy on the expert labeled set.

cs.CL