Skip to content

The process

Extraction is the easy part.

Document AI sells you an API and an LLM that reads a page. It works. The return only arrives once you’ve built the whole process around it.

The problem

You bought an API. You still don’t have a process.

Every vendor now ships document-in, data-out. The model reads the page, returns JSON, and that part genuinely works.

But JSON isn’t an outcome. Somebody still has to decide what the document is, whether the values are right, what they mean against your business, and what happens when they’re wrong.

That gap is where implementations stall, and where the promised ROI goes missing.

The claim

Capture is one step of seven.

The step everyone sells is the one that has commoditized. The other six are where the work lives, and the value with it.

What you’re sold

An endpoint. Send a document, receive fields. Priced per page, and increasingly hard to tell apart from the next vendor’s.

What you need

A process that classifies, extracts, links to your knowledge, reasons, validates, escalates to a person when it should, and learns from what they change.

The whole process

Where document AI stops, and where ROI starts.

01
Sorting the document
what is this?
02
Reading the page
what does it say?
most document AI stops here
03
Matching your records
what does it mean to us?
04
Automatic follow-up
what else must happen?
05
Running the checks
is it right?
06
Human review
is it right enough?
07
Remembering the fix
what did we learn?
every human edit becomes knowledge the next run starts with

Steps one to five are capability, and the frontier keeps improving them. Six and seven are where the asset accumulates, and it accumulates to you.

Stage 1 of 7 · Sorting the document

Know what you’re holding before you read it.

Routing is a real decision. The same page means different things depending on which document it belongs to, and everything downstream inherits this call.

One intake batch → three routes

Invoice92%
Remittance88%
Unknown41%

Low confidence routes to a person before anything else runs.

Stage 2 of 7 · Reading the page

The part everyone sells.

It’s good, and it gets cheaper every year. Worth showing we do it well. Worth being honest that on its own it solves nothing.

Every value carries its source

total_amount
412,000.00
page 1 · line 14 · confidence 0.98

The value, and where it came from. Provenance is what makes the rest auditable.

Stage 3 of 7 · Matching your records

Raw values mean nothing until they meet your business.

A vendor name is a string until it resolves to your vendor, with your terms, your history and your rules attached. This is where your knowledge enters the run.

“ACME LOGISTIC”Acme Logistics Ltd

resolved to your vendor record

Payment termsNet 45, not the stated Net 30
Vendor ruleOften adds freight surcharges
History2 disputes in the last year

Structured, versioned, and portable across any model.

Stage 4 of 7 · Automatic follow-up

Some documents need work before they’re usable.

Look something up, reconcile against another system, chase a missing reference, decide what else this triggers. An agent picks its own tools within the plan’s bounds.

Agent step · tool trace

Task · the PO reference is missing, find it or say why not
1Searched the linked ERP for the vendor + amount
2Found two candidate POs, both open
3Compared line items against the invoice
4Concluded matched PO-4471, flagged for confirmation

Agent tooling improves every year. The plan it runs inside, and the record it leaves, stay with you.

Stage 5 of 7 · Running the checks

Three places to be wrong.

On the document (does it add up?), against your systems (does it match the record?), and through agent steps (is it reasonable?).

On the documentinternal maths

Line items sum to 411,200. The stated total is 412,000.

Against your systemsservice bridge

Vendor bank account does not match the record in your system.

Via agent stepreasonableness

Amount is 4x this vendor's twelve-month average.

Each catches a failure the other two cannot see.

Stage 6 of 7 · Human review

Judgment, where it’s worth paying for.

Not every document, and not every field. Only the ones where the system isn’t confident, or where the stakes justify it. The reviewer opens a case that’s already been assembled.

Review task · assembled for you

Invoice 8841 · Acme Logistics Ltd

Why it reached you

· Totals disagree by 800
· Bank account differs from your record
· 4x this vendor’s average
total_amount 412,000.00source p.1 l.14
ApproveCorrectReject

Stage 7 of 7 · Remembering the fix

The correction is the asset.

When a reviewer changes something, they’re telling you what ‘correct’ means here. Captured, that becomes knowledge the next run starts with. Discarded, you pay for the same correction forever.

One correction, captured

1Reviewer changedNet 30 → Net 45
2Pattern distilledthis vendor is always Net 45
3Knowledge proposedadd a vendor-terms rule
4Human confirmsone click, by someone who knows
5Attachedthe next run starts with it

Into knowledge that outlives the model that produced it.

Why it compounds

The seventh step is what makes the other six worth building.

A pipeline that runs the same way forever is a cost. One that gets a little more right every time someone corrects it is an asset. The question is what form that asset takes: weights you cannot inspect and cannot move, or structured knowledge you can read, version, and carry to whichever model you use next.

1.5 million activities a month in production, SOC 2 Type II. During a Test Drive we measure yours, on your documents, and you keep the measurement either way.

Share of documents needing a human

cycle 1illustrative

Same work, fewer exceptions each cycle. It improves as it runs, and the improvement is yours.

Implement the process, not the endpoint.

Kodexa runs all seven steps as one auditable workflow. Every correction your team makes becomes knowledge you can read, version, and take to any model.