"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"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."
"Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"For automating mundane activities, I can recommend WorkFusion."
"The document processing engine is good. We're extracting around 70 data points from a given document, and we have an automated extraction rate of 80 percent for those fields."
"The most valuable features are the Excel activities. It has a number of Excel activities that are quite reliable."
"WorkFusion helps by speeding up processes. The process takes time. It has business costs associated because there are people waiting to take the next steps in the process. The end result of waiting, whether it is an internal or external team, is that they are delayed. Therefore, it helps us in speeding up business processes and improving employee morale, as people don't have to do repetitive work anymore."
"The solution is stable, we have not had any glitches or problems."
"Their robots have increased the rate of efficiency by two to five times in our organization. There is still a human element to code out the package running the robots. You can't just click something and have it run. However, once that has been done, you can parallelize it 10 or 100 times in a fairly straightforward manner."
"It really does help by either freeing up people's time to focus on more value-added tasks or reducing headcount. We generally have other things that we can get people to do, helping make the employees' work more meaningful since they are not having to do the mundane stuff."
"We recommend different solutions based on our customers' needs, and WorkFusion is what we offer for those who need a premium solution."
"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."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"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."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"The user experience could be better both from an RPA perspective and from a business perspective."
"I would like it if they provided a more detailed roadmap in terms of where they are going with the product. As we are trying to make decisions about the things that we are going to do to try to augment our capabilities, we could know whether they are thinking about the same things or not."
"The solution is not user-friendly, this is something they should improve."
"So far, we have developed only one automation using machine learning. The results were less than optimal. Part of this could be because of the use case that was selected. Overall, our experience was suboptimal. WorkFusion was an outstanding partner in terms of providing their experts for free to help us on that particular use case, but we still have a lot of things to figure out in terms of how to use its machine learning capability."
"This is a Java-based application that takes up a lot of space and when it runs, consumes a lot of memory. This affects the reliability because it gets to a point where it hangs."
"There is enhanced functionality I would like to see, things that would further enhance the user experience, deliver greater efficiencies, and further mitigate risk."
"There could be better version control through their web platform. That is something that could be improved on. Integration from the IDE, e.g., from WorkFusion Studio directly into Control Tower, would be nice to have too."
"We are having some database issues, but we are addressing them."
HyperScience is ranked 6th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 5 reviews while WorkFusion is ranked 2nd in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 14 reviews. HyperScience is rated 7.4, while WorkFusion is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of HyperScience writes "Beneficial user-training module, reliable, and useful digital extractions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WorkFusion writes "Enables us to process double the amount of work with the same amount of people". HyperScience is most compared with ABBYY FlexiCapture, UiPath, Kofax RPA, IBM Datacap and ABBYY Vantage, whereas WorkFusion is most compared with UiPath, Blue Prism, Automation Anywhere (AA), Microsoft Power Automate and Kryon RPA. See our HyperScience vs. WorkFusion 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.
