Beyond the Editing Canvas: Evidence Divergence in OOXML-to-LLM Ingestion

📅 2026-08-26
📈 Citations: 0
Influential: 0
📄 PDF
🤖 AI Summary
研究揭示了OOXML文档在转换为LLM输入时内容显示不一致的问题,通过系统分析OOXML规范并测试多种工具,发现21种导致证据分叉的情况。
📝 Abstract
LLM pipelines increasingly ingest Office Open XML (OOXML) documents (Word, Excel, and PowerPoint files) as first-class evidence in financial, compliance, and retrieval-augmented workflows, implicitly assuming semantic integrity: that the evidence consumed by the model matches the content shown in the Microsoft Office suite editing canvas. We show that this assumption can fail in OOXML-to-LLM pipelines. The same specification-valid OOXML file can yield one evidentiary view in Microsoft Office and another when extracted for an LLM. Each view is treated as authoritative by its consumer, a condition we call plural ground truth. The ingestion contract rarely states which view and semantic roles become model evidence or preserves how that evidence was derived. We call the specification-grounded OOXML constructions that induce such divergence evidence forks. We systematically traverse and mine the OOXML specification and confirm 21 evidence forks across Excel, Word, and PowerPoint, spanning six dimensions of view construction. All 13 tools in our extraction panel emit evidence from at least one fork. We test four native-ingestion LLM APIs and seven web chatbots. Each test document carries a trap: a task-relevant fact exposed by extraction but not shown in Office. Across this 21-mechanism evaluation, the four APIs return the trap in 48--76% of trials. For 20 of 21 mechanisms, at least one of the eleven interfaces returns the trap. Our measurements further show that exposure is shaped upstream of the model by the ingestion path and extractor configuration. A source-level survey of sixteen popular open-source LLM projects further shows that default OOXML ingestion paths concentrate on affected extractor families.
Problem

Research questions and friction points this paper is trying to address.

OOXML
LLM
Evidence Divergence
Semantic Integrity
Plural Ground Truth
Innovation

Methods, ideas, or system contributions that make the work stand out.

Evidence Divergence
OOXML-to-LLM Ingestion
Plural Ground Truth
Evidence Forks
💼 Related Jobs
No related jobs found.
S
Side Liu
Tulane University
J
Jiangpeng Liu
Tulane University
J
Jinwen Xin
Wuhan University
G
Guojun Peng
Wuhan University
Jiang Ming
Jiang Ming
Tulane University
Software and Systems Security