We performed a comparison between HyperScience and OpenText Intelligent Capture based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"It provides the best accuracy for handwritten forms, which is a struggle in the industry. You can take processes with a lot of manual work and streamline them through this tool."
"Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"One of the most valuable features of HyperScience is the user-training module. Whenever the extraction takes place, based on the way we have trained HyperScience, it would give us some success status or a certain confidence level. If the solution has processed something that it determined was not extracted correctly it will queue those items for manual review."
"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"The solution is very powerful because it allows for custom scripting."
"It allows you to image capture, scan documents and use machine learning to automatically index and tie them."
"We use it to capture documents coming through our product and mobile channels and make them available for our business to access and email. We use it to automate the email workflow in our applications, pull the documents, and email them to the users."
"The automated version of the vendor invoice management is great."
"The enterprise and capturing feature of OpenText is its valuable feature. As we have integrated CRM with OpenText."
"Being able to have accurate extraction is most valuable. It has machine learning and other tools to make the extraction more accurate."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
"No solution is perfect and there are several different scenarios that could be improved in HyperScience. One area is where there are multiple tables in the same form I have seen HyperScience struggle. There is some issue with supporting the extraction from multiple tables involved on the same form. If this could improve, it would be a big benefit."
"HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"The product's usability could be better. The first pain point is that we're getting the output in a different format, and we were expecting a different timetable. The second point is that if you want better results, HyperScience says you have to configure a minimal PDF or a maximum of 400 PDFs. If you want results with 400 PDFs for what's written by these doctors, then you also configure the maximum of 400 templates for that. So, it's essentially a lack of support from HyperScience. In the next release, it would be better if failure scenarios were reduced. It would also help if they offered different formats, inputs or injections, and added different scenarios."
"If something is handwritten and attached to an email, it doesn't capture the information correctly."
"Knowledge of .NET is required to effectively use the solution or it can be complicated."
"The setup is medium complexity."
"The area for improvement primarily centers around licensing concerns rather than technical issues. Captiva, intended for larger clients, poses challenges for medium and small businesses due to licensing costs. The current licensing model is based on volume, such as purchasing a volume for one million dollars per year for scanning. This pricing structure may be prohibitive for companies with constrained budgets. Another aspect requiring attention is the mobile capture feature, which, although experiencing recent enhancements in intelligent document processing through AI, could benefit from further improvements. Specifically, there is room for enhancement in enabling users to efficiently capture documents using their smartphones."
"It can be more user-friendly, and it should also have more reporting capabilities. There are also a few other things that need improvement."
"We are using it to improve the image and the documentation for the cases. And sometimes, some cases have more than fifteen different types. We use some tools as fixed standard analysis and provide information to support the different types to take some decisions and help in an automated process. We choose the case type and subtype DNS scanning documents from the data entry up."
"I would say what most of the document management solutions are lacking is smartness to detect the duplicate storage of the documents"
HyperScience is ranked 5th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews while OpenText Intelligent Capture is ranked 7th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews. HyperScience is rated 7.6, while OpenText Intelligent Capture is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HyperScience writes "It has a lot of functionality, whatever we use, but a few things could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Intelligent Capture writes "A powerful solution for custom scripting but .NET knowledge is required". HyperScience is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, UiPath, Instabase, Microsoft Power Automate and Infrrd OCR, whereas OpenText Intelligent Capture is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, Tungsten TotalAgility, UiPath Document Understanding, IBM Datacap and Hyland Brainware. See our HyperScience vs. OpenText Intelligent Capture report.
See our list of best Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) vendors.
We monitor all Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.