What should happen before extracted data enters your workpapers?
A document workflow needs a useful exception path. This working demonstration checks three fictional records: one reconciles, one has a missing period and one has a balance mismatch.
Built by Soxoa, September 16, 2026. This is an internal demonstration of deterministic review rules, not a customer case study, OCR accuracy benchmark or promised time saving.
Try the review gate
These fictional, already-structured records demonstrate validation after extraction. No file is uploaded and no OCR model runs.
- Document
- SYNTHETIC-001
- Period
- 2026-08
- Opening balance
- $1,000.00
- Deposits
- $2,500.00
- Withdrawals
- $800.00
- Closing balance
- $2,700.00
The implementation around the check
- Agree the input. Define permitted document types, fields, access and retention before connecting a source system.
- Extract and retain context. Keep the source available for an authorized reviewer. Supported formats and integrations are tested during scope, not assumed.
- Route exceptions. Missing or inconsistent fields go to a person. Check the destination mapping and record the resolution before release.
- Approve the handoff. Confirm who can post or export, how duplicates are handled and how a failed transfer is recovered.
What we would measure in your pilot
Use representative, permitted work to measure required-field accuracy, missed exceptions, reviewer time, duplicate handling and successful destination updates. Compare these with your observed manual baseline. Agree acceptance criteria before testing; no result is assumed from this demonstration.
Our related parser products, including 1099Parser and StatementOCR, provide separate product examples. They share ownership with Soxoa and are not independent endorsements. This demo does not call their extraction APIs.
A three-document extraction pilot
We also ran three synthetic invoice PDFs through our production parser service on September 16, 2026 Pacific time. All three requests returned successfully. A separate, offline review check held the two intended exceptions before any destination write.
- Clean arithmetic: $250 in line items and a $250 total. Ready for source comparison, with a vendor-label difference still requiring review.
- Mismatch: $250 in line items and a $300 printed total. Held for review.
- Missing total: the returned total stayed null. Held for review.
Each request took 5.15–5.33 seconds including network time. These are three observations on labeled text PDFs, not a typical latency claim or a test of scanned invoices. Nothing was approved for payment. We have not measured reviewer time, customer savings or a complete destination integration.
Inspect the synthetic input packet and download the returned fields and decisions. The invoice cases are the final three pages; the earlier pages test other document types.
Bring one workflow to scope
Describe the input, the destination, who reviews exceptions and the recurring bottleneck. Do not send sensitive client records through an initial inquiry.
See the one-workflow implementation offer or book a workflow discussion. An optional public-information assessment can help identify starting questions.