Issue with Generating Key-Value Pairs from CMS 1500 Form

Open

#59 opened on Jul 12, 2024 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty: 4/5
Estimated time: 3-5 days
Newbie friendliness: 25/100

Issue type: Bug
Clarity: Needs clarification
Activity status: Stale
Tech stack: aws, jupyter-notebook, python
Domain: ai, cloud, data

Research direction

Open extraction-parsers/cms1500-parser.ipynb and run it against the referenced CMS 1500 test sample. Inspect the generated key-value pairs, especially the table section, and compare them with the form image; the issue is complete when the missing details and key associations are extracted accurately.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

Hi,
I am working on reading the form and processing data from CMS 1500 using the provided code. However, I have noticed several issues with the key-value pair generation. The current implementation fails to fetch many details from the form accurately and incorrectly processes some elements. REPO LINK
Problems Encountered:

Many key-value pairs are not being extracted correctly.

Some values are not being associated correctly with their keys.

The code seems unable to handle certain sections of the form, such as tables.

In your test sample form I am not seeing any of the details belongs to the table
Please do respond asap :(

Dominant language: Jupyter Notebook
Stars: 449
Forks: 262
PR merge metrics: No merged PRs in 30d

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Similar issues

Eval bug: Ministral-3 tool-calls during reasoning are not processed Open

bug-unconfirmed

Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 76/100

ggml-org/llama.cpp#29248 · Opened Sep 21, 2026
[BUG][ConcurrentWorkflow._run][Agent outputs are collected in completion order, so show_dashboard changes the returned ordering] Open

Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 86/100

kyegomez/swarms#2317 · Opened Sep 21, 2026
Inconsistency in 04-python-agent-framework.ipynb Open

needs-review

Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 88/100

microsoft/ai-agents-for-beginners#754 · 1 comment · Opened Sep 21, 2026
Add official support for the nanocoder agent Open

enhancement

Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100

JuliusBrussee/caveman#1102 · 1 comment · Opened Sep 21, 2026
Memory search: MMR diversity scores any two non-Latin, non-CJK snippets as identical (1.0) Open

Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100

use-agent-os/agent-os#3263 · Opened Sep 21, 2026

More AI Infra & Agents issues