# Towards Boosting the Accuracy of Non-Latin Scene Text Recognition

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.03185 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.03185/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 13 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Jan 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [Inception-v4, Inception-ResNet and the Impact of Residual Connections on Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.07261/) (2016)
- [An End-to-End Trainable Neural Network for Image-based Sequence Recognition and Its Application to Scene Text Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1507.05717/) (2015)
- [Synthetic Data for Text Localisation in Natural Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1604.06646/) (2016)
- [COCO-Text: Dataset and Benchmark for Text Detection and Recognition in Natural Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1601.07140/) (2016)
- [Synthetic Data and Artificial Neural Networks for Natural Scene Text Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1406.2227/) (2014)
- [Total-Text: A Comprehensive Dataset for Scene Text Detection and Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1710.10400/) (2017)
- [ICDAR2019 Robust Reading Challenge on Multi-lingual Scene Text Detection and Recognition -- RRC-MLT-2019](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.00945/) (2019)
- [ICDAR 2019 Robust Reading Challenge on Reading Chinese Text on Signboard](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.09641/) (2019)
- [ICDAR 2019 Competition on Large-scale Street View Text with Partial Labeling -- RRC-LSVT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.07741/) (2019)
- [ICDAR2017 Competition on Reading Chinese Text in the Wild (RCTW-17)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1708.09585/) (2017)
- [E2E-MLT - an Unconstrained End-to-End Method for Multi-Language Scene Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1801.09919/) (2018)
- [Benchmarking Scene Text Recognition in Devanagari, Telugu and Malayalam](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.04437/) (2021)
- [Mask R-CNN with Pyramid Attention Network for Scene Text Detection](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.09058/) (2018)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [DongbaMIE: A Multimodal Information Extraction Dataset for Evaluating Semantic Understanding of Dongba Pictograms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.03644/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Scene-text recognition is remarkably better in Latin languages than the non-Latin languages due to several factors like multiple fonts, simplistic vocabulary statistics, updated data generation tools, and writing systems. This paper examines the possible reasons for low accuracy by comparing English datasets with non-Latin languages. We compare various features like the size (width and height) of the word images and word length statistics. Over the last decade, generating synthetic datasets with powerful deep learning techniques has tremendously improved scene-text recognition. Several controlled experiments are performed on English, by varying the number of (i) fonts to create the synthetic data and (ii) created word images. We discover that these factors are critical for the scene-text recognition systems. The English synthetic datasets utilize over 1400 fonts while Arabic and other non-Latin datasets utilize less than 100 fonts for data generation. Since some of these languages are a part of different regions, we garner additional fonts through a region-based search to improve the scene-text recognition models in Arabic and Devanagari. We improve the Word Recognition Rates (WRRs) on Arabic MLT-17 and MLT-19 datasets by 24.54% and 2.32% compared to previous works or baselines. We achieve WRR gains of 7.88% and 3.72% for IIIT-ILST and MLT-19 Devanagari datasets.