/p/2026-10-24 · explainer
Paper explainer · 2610.30997 · Barali and Paudel

The schema asked for three. The document had one.

Put a minimum count in the JSON schema you paste into the prompt — never enforced, just stated — and the share of extraction lists longer than the document’s true count goes from 34.5% to 55.4%. Enforce it in the decoder and it reaches 90.1%. The extra entries are mostly real text lifted out of the document, so the guard you already have — check each entry appears in the source — passes most of them. Across 8 open-weight models, 558 real documents and 9 annotated sets, a shown minimum adds 0.62 entries on average, and re-asking with the validation error makes it far worse.

01 · The minimum becomes a target

choose what the schema says about the count

02 · Which models do it

switch the condition every model is run under

03 · The padding is real text

tap a guard to switch it on

04 · What actually helps

tap a condition to read it off the plot
over-counts more often than the no-count baseline over-counts less often, or not measured

05 · Your own extractor illustrative

Results

What the paper actually measured

What it does not show

In practice