{"title":"Redacted text detection using neural image segmentation methods.","authors":"Ruben van Heusden, Kaj Meijer, Maarten Marx","doi":"10.1007/s10032-025-00513-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The redaction of sensitive information in documents is common practice in specific types of organizations. This happens for example in court proceedings or in documents released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The ability to automatically detect when information has been redacted has several practical applications, such as the gathering of statistics on the amount of redaction present in documents, enabling a critical view on redaction practices. It can also be used to further investigate redactions, and whether or not the used techniques provide sufficient anonymization. The task is particularly challenging because of the large variety of redaction methods and techniques, from software for automatic redaction to manual redactions by pen. Any detection system must be robust to a large variety of inputs, as it will be run on many documents that might not even contain redactions. In this study, we evaluate two neural methods for the task, namely a Mask R-CNN model and a Mask2Former model, and compare them to a rule-based model based on optical character recognition and morphological operations. The best performing, the Mask R-CNN model, has a recall of .94 with a precision of .96 over a challenging data set containing several redaction types. Adding many pages without redaction barely lowers this score (precision drops to .90, recall drops to .92). The Mask2Former model is most robust to inputs without redactions, producing the least false positives of all models.</p>","PeriodicalId":50277,"journal":{"name":"International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition","volume":"28 4","pages":"597-607"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12662892/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10032-025-00513-1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The redaction of sensitive information in documents is common practice in specific types of organizations. This happens for example in court proceedings or in documents released under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The ability to automatically detect when information has been redacted has several practical applications, such as the gathering of statistics on the amount of redaction present in documents, enabling a critical view on redaction practices. It can also be used to further investigate redactions, and whether or not the used techniques provide sufficient anonymization. The task is particularly challenging because of the large variety of redaction methods and techniques, from software for automatic redaction to manual redactions by pen. Any detection system must be robust to a large variety of inputs, as it will be run on many documents that might not even contain redactions. In this study, we evaluate two neural methods for the task, namely a Mask R-CNN model and a Mask2Former model, and compare them to a rule-based model based on optical character recognition and morphological operations. The best performing, the Mask R-CNN model, has a recall of .94 with a precision of .96 over a challenging data set containing several redaction types. Adding many pages without redaction barely lowers this score (precision drops to .90, recall drops to .92). The Mask2Former model is most robust to inputs without redactions, producing the least false positives of all models.
期刊介绍:
The large number of existing documents and the production of a multitude of new ones every year raise important issues in efficient handling, retrieval and storage of these documents and the information which they contain. This has led to the emergence of new research domains dealing with the recognition by computers of the constituent elements of documents - including characters, symbols, text, lines, graphics, images, handwriting, signatures, etc. In addition, these new domains deal with automatic analyses of the overall physical and logical structures of documents, with the ultimate objective of a high-level understanding of their semantic content. We have also seen renewed interest in optical character recognition (OCR) and handwriting recognition during the last decade. Document analysis and recognition are obviously the next stage.
Automatic, intelligent processing of documents is at the intersections of many fields of research, especially of computer vision, image analysis, pattern recognition and artificial intelligence, as well as studies on reading, handwriting and linguistics. Although quality document related publications continue to appear in journals dedicated to these domains, the community will benefit from having this journal as a focal point for archival literature dedicated to document analysis and recognition.