# Benchmarking Large Language Models for Safety Data Extraction

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.11204 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.11204/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 9 of its 23 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Apr 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.09675/) (2019)
- [Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contexts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.03172/) (2023)
- [A Systematic Survey of Prompt Engineering in Large Language Models: Techniques and Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.07927/) (2024)
- [The Prompt Report: A Systematic Survey of Prompt Engineering Techniques](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.06608/) (2024)
- [A Survey of Prompt Engineering Methods in Large Language Models for Different NLP Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.12994/) (2024)
- [Document Parsing Unveiled: Techniques, Challenges, and Prospects for Structured Information Extraction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21169/) (2024)
- [A Closer Look at Classification Evaluation Metrics and a Critical Reflection of Common Evaluation Practice](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.16958/) (2024)
- [Revisiting Chain-of-Thought Prompting: Zero-shot Can Be Stronger than Few-shot](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.14641/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Accurate extraction of structured information from Safety Data Sheets (SDS) remains challenging in industrial safety due to heterogeneous document formats and the limitations of traditional rule-based methods. This study benchmarks state-of-the-art Large Language Models (LLMs) for automated SDS data extraction, comparing text-based and multimodal processing pipelines. We systematically evaluate four models: Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-4o, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, and Llama 3.1-70B, across three prompting strategies: zero-shot, few-shot, and chain-of-thought. The evaluation framework assessed accuracy, latency, and cost across more than 50,000 extracted data fields. Results show that text-based extraction consistently outperforms multimodal processing across all metrics. Gemini 1.5 Pro combined with a Chain-of-Thought prompt achieved the highest accuracy (84%), outperforming GPT-4o (81%) and Claude 3.7 Sonnet (79%). However, no model surpassed the 90% accuracy threshold commonly required for reliable real-world deployment. These findings indicate that general-purpose LLMs are not yet robust enough for unsupervised industrial use, though performance suggests strong potential with task-specific fine-tuning. Future research should focus on domain-adapted training, model calibration, and the integration of Human-in-the-Loop verification to ensure safety-critical reliability.