Your Agreements Are a Database You Can't Query — Hiral Shah, Docusign & Sean Sodha, NVIDIA

Read the talk

Making Agreement Data Queryable: Docusign’s Purpose-Built Approach to Table Extraction

Selected presentation frame from Your Agreements Are a Database You Can't Query — Hiral Shah, Docusign & Sean Sodha, NVIDIA at 589 seconds
Making Agreement Data Queryable: Docusign’s Purpose-Built Approach to Table Extraction

Hiral Shah and Sean Sodha explain why contract tables need layout-aware extraction, how a small vision language model fits into Agreement Manager, and why preprocessing, OCR and accuracy still matter.

From a talk by Hiral Shah and Sean Sodha

At a glance

Ideas worth remembering

  • Table extraction must preserve relationships between cells, rows and columns. Recovering the words alone can lose the meaning of pricing tiers, rate cards and service levels.

  • The approximately 850–900 million-parameter parser consolidates layout, text, reading order and table structure into one model invocation. Docusign still retains OCR in other processing routes.

  • Docusign reports twentyfold higher table-extraction throughput against the open-source models it tested. The talk does not supply enough evaluation detail to generalize that gain to the entire pipeline.

  • Preprocessing suits large repositories and downstream use of contract terms; immediate Q&A on a new upload has different latency, batching and concurrency needs.

  • FP8, FP4 and multi-token generation are proposed performance improvements. The presenters prioritize extraction accuracy first and distinguish stored agreement data from the retrieval mechanisms that may later use it.

The signed agreement is only the beginning

Selected presentation frame from Your Agreements Are a Database You Can't Query — Hiral Shah, Docusign & Sean Sodha, NVIDIA at 212 seconds
The signed agreement is only the beginning

A company can negotiate a contract carefully and still struggle to answer a basic question about what it bought. Hiral Shah, a senior director of product at Docusign, opens with that gap: pricing and other important terms live inside agreements, but storing a signed document does not make its contents usable. Together with Sean Sodha, a product manager at NVIDIA, she describes the work of turning those documents into structured data.

Shah puts the engineering problem at Docusign’s scale: 1.9 million paying customers, a billion users and a million agreements processed each day. She also cites a study conducted with Deloitte that estimated $2 trillion in negotiated agreement value that organizations do not capitalize on. Her explanation is practical: recovering the terms requires human reading and review, followed by manual work across disconnected systems. The figure describes the opportunity she attributes to that study; it is not a measured return from the extraction system.

Docusign’s intelligent agreement management platform, IAM, addresses the agreement life cycle from creation and negotiation through signing, storage and analysis. The extraction problem becomes especially important after signing, when people want answers from PDFs, images and repositories containing ten or twenty years of business history. Agreements also have relationships: one can govern another. Reading an individual document therefore does not necessarily provide everything needed to answer a business question.

Shah’s example is a company asking how many total tokens it contracted for with Claude. The answer may exist in the agreements, yet remain difficult to recover because it appears in different forms and sits among related documents. This gives the system two responsibilities: extract useful terms from each agreement and organize them so people can answer questions across the company’s agreements.

0:130:21
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

0:13 · section reference included

Tables carry terms that plain text loses

Selected presentation frame from Your Agreements Are a Database You Can't Query — Hiral Shah, Docusign & Sean Sodha, NVIDIA at 292 seconds
Tables carry terms that plain text loses

Many of the terms people need most—pricing tiers, SKUs, service-level agreements and rate cards—appear in tables. Shah says traditional extraction tools and generic vision language models failed on the tables her team tested. Reading a page line by line can preserve words while losing the relationships that give those words meaning. A merged cell, for example, may apply across several rows or columns; flattening the table into a text sequence can obscure that scope.

That loss becomes work for legal, procurement and sales teams, which must return to the document to locate and interpret the terms. Docusign’s partnership with NVIDIA concentrates on this specific failure: extracting tables while understanding their layout. The goal is to preserve enough structure that downstream users can work with the commercial data rather than repeatedly reconstruct it from the page.

3:524:22
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

3:52 · section reference included

Finding the document and reading its tables are separate jobs

Selected presentation frame from Your Agreements Are a Database You Can't Query — Hiral Shah, Docusign & Sean Sodha, NVIDIA at 464 seconds
Finding the document and reading its tables are separate jobs

Sodha places document extraction within NVIDIA’s Nemotron Retriever work, which includes embedding models, re-ranking models and extraction models. He separates finding the right document in a large corpus from finding the right information inside it. A query might narrow a petabyte-scale collection to a handful of documents, but that selection still leaves the system with the task of understanding their contents. Docusign’s collaboration focuses on the latter problem, particularly table extraction.

Table variety makes specialization useful. Nested tables, merged rows, merged columns and merged cells create many possible layouts. Sodha describes NVIDIA’s wider approach as publishing model weights, datasets, techniques and supporting blueprints, including work on quantization, distillation and pruning. Those releases form the surrounding model ecosystem; the mechanism central to this talk is the Nemotron parse model’s ability to recover document structure.

The parser is small by the standards Sodha associates with general vision language models: approximately 850–900 million parameters. He describes a single model invocation that returns text, semantic formatting, layout, reading order and preserved table structure. This consolidates tasks that might otherwise require separate models for page elements and tables. It can be served through NVIDIA NIM or vLLM.

Sodha calls it an extractor because its job is to represent the supplied document faithfully. That description concerns its purpose: later in the Q&A, he explains that the model still generates its output one token at a time. Likewise, a single model invocation does not mean every output token appears simultaneously. The consolidation is at the document-processing level, while decoding remains sequential.

NVIDIA evaluates the model along an accuracy-versus-performance Pareto curve: the useful target is a better combination of extraction quality and processing speed. Sodha describes a comparison with other open-source models on a table-extraction benchmark, but gives no numerical accuracy results in his explanation. The talk therefore supports the evaluation approach without establishing an accuracy score or a complete ranking.

5:175:47
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

5:17 · section reference included

An order form becomes data people can use

Selected presentation frame from Your Agreements Are a Database You Can't Query — Hiral Shah, Docusign & Sean Sodha, NVIDIA at 574 seconds
An order form becomes data people can use

The Agreement Manager demonstration follows an order form from upload to structured output. Agreement Manager serves as a central repository of signed agreements. Selecting a document starts its upload and AI processing, and a jobs engine handles the processing. Shah then opens the file and describes extracted metadata covering key terms and commercial details, with highlights and navigation back to the sections where those details appear.

The pricing-table portion is where Shah identifies NVIDIA’s model as doing the work. It breaks complex tables into structured order details, which can be downloaded as CSV or accessed through an API. The source navigation and export serve different needs: a person can inspect a term in its original context, while a finance or procurement team can carry the structured values into further analysis and operational systems.

Shah describes extraction happening within seconds in the demonstration, while also noting that the demo was shortened. That example illustrates the product flow rather than establishing a general latency guarantee. Customers’ repositories range from thousands to millions of agreements, and Docusign uses a proprietary agreement data model to structure information both per agreement and across an organization, with search above it. The presentation does not detail that model’s schema or how it resolves relationships between agreements.

8:369:06
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

8:30 · section reference included

Specialization changes the cost of extraction

Selected presentation frame from Your Agreements Are a Database You Can't Query — Hiral Shah, Docusign & Sean Sodha, NVIDIA at 736 seconds
Specialization changes the cost of extraction

Shah’s main lesson from trying different models is to choose a model for the job it needs to perform. She credits purpose-built models with helping Docusign bring capabilities to market faster. She also reports that using less context reduced latency and delivery cost in this workload. Context size and parameter count are separate considerations, but both belong in the decision when the system must process agreements at Docusign’s volume.

The strongest performance claim is about table-extraction throughput. Shah reports that Nemotron was twenty times faster than the other open-source models Docusign tested, measured by tables extracted per second. This matters for a large processing workload, but it does not establish a twentyfold improvement in the entire agreement pipeline. She does not specify the comparison models, hardware, batch sizes or absolute throughput, so the result remains specific to the reported evaluation.

The next planned step moves from extracting information on a page to finding the relevant page in the first place. Sodha describes further retrieval work and discussions around NVIDIA Agent Toolkit, followed by a move toward more production-scale agents. These are plans for the partnership, rather than capabilities demonstrated in the order-form walkthrough.

11:0611:36
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

11:36 · section reference included

Why query-time agents do not remove preprocessing

The Q&A tests whether an agent could bypass OCR and extract only the structure relevant to a question. Shah allows that dynamic processing can work for smaller, reactive use cases. At the scale of thousands of agreements, however, she wants documents already processed and important information already identified. Otherwise, the user’s question must wait for document processing as well as the answer.

Downstream work gives another reason to extract data ahead of time. Shah uses a procurement team that wants to put a contract’s pricing table into Coupa so payments align with the agreed prices. That need extends beyond answering a question about one uploaded document. The organization needs structured terms available for ongoing work, even if an agent helps with parts of the process.

Sodha frames the choice as throughput versus latency. Processing a large document collection upfront spends compute during ingestion so later queries can use the extracted information. A newly uploaded contract for immediate Q&A puts more pressure on the time to the first answer. Batch sizes, concurrency and processing techniques should change with those goals; the engineering decision includes when to spend compute, as well as which model to run.

A follow-up question makes the production architecture clearer: Docusign still uses a hybrid pipeline. The table route combines layout understanding with extraction, while OCR continues to handle other fields, metadata and clause text. Shah describes two processing routes and multiple modules. The small parser consolidates work in the table path, but it has not replaced all document-processing components.

13:2413:45
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

13:12 · section reference included

Accuracy comes before further performance tuning

Asked about quantization, Sodha says the model currently uses FP16, with paths toward FP8 and FP4 over the following months. He also names Blackwell and NVFP4 as part of NVIDIA’s performance direction. Shah says Docusign uses FP16 and some older models, but does not give a precise breakdown of its deployed configurations. The lower-precision options are presented as future optimization work, not demonstrated production results.

Decoding is another possible optimization. Sodha says the current model produces one token at a time and suggests multi-token generation, along with further encoder-decoder optimization, as ways to improve performance. His stated priority is first to establish accuracy and useful value in the system, then improve the performance side of the Pareto curve. No speedup from those proposed changes is reported.

The final exchange returns to the difference between extraction and retrieval. Sodha believes Docusign deploys directly through vLLM, but expresses that as a belief rather than a confirmed configuration. When an attendee asks about the search mechanism, he clarifies that the demonstrated work is extraction. Shah adds that answers come from agreement data already extracted and stored. Their explanation does not specify an embedding index, graph-based retrieval method or search algorithm.

That distinction completes the architecture described here. Layout-aware extraction makes difficult commercial terms available as structured data; storage, search and downstream workflows give that data its business use. The practical decision is where specialization improves a real workload: Docusign uses the small model for tables, retains OCR for other content, preprocesses for large repositories and leaves further retrieval and performance work for the partnership’s next steps.

16:0916:14
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

16:09 · section reference included

Read the complete timestamped transcript
  1. 0:13

    Uh, welcome everyone to our session. Um, I'm Hiral. I'm a senior director of product, um, at Docusign, and I'm joined by Sean.

  2. 0:21

    Hello, everyone. I'm a product manager at NVIDIA.

  3. 0:23

    So today, Sean and I are going to talk about a massive problem that every enterprise faces, which is agreement data, large-scale agreement data. Agreements are a big part of any relationship any B2B organization kind of goes through, day in, day out, and a lot of that data is captured inside that agreements, and it's very critical, whether it's pricing tables, lot of it, and it's all in a lot of different unstructured format.

  4. 0:54

    And that's kind of what we are going to show, is how Docusign partner with NVIDIA are fixing that on making that data available, readable, usable for a lot of our kind of organizations. So here is kind of just a quick map of our talk today. We'll start with just the stakes. Why does this matter? Why the scale is so large? And then we'll dive deep into the technical architecture of how we are approaching it, how we have tackled this thing, especially this document processing

  5. 1:23

    at, at scale. And then finally, we'll cover what we have learned from our evaluation of all of the different models we've tried for different purposes and share our learnings with you. So why... Like, you know, just to understand why this is a big problem. When you think about Docusign... Raise your hands, how many of you have used Docusign? Anyone who's employed, probably the HR docs, right? So it's a massive scale. Everyone ha- uses Docusign. For us, it's a massive

  6. 1:53

    engineering problem as well because just look at the scale. We have 1.9 million customers who are paying us and a billion users. What does that imply? We process a million agreements a day that needs to now structurize, make it readable, make it queryable, usable. And, you know, in the past, we've worked with Deloitte on a study, and it says that there's $2 trillion captured in this agreement negotiated value that no one

  7. 2:23

    capitalizes, no one goes back and gets that, um, data back. Right? And why? It's because they have to do a lot of human reading, human reviews. There's disconnected systems, lot of manual workflows that are there. So that's kinda why Docusign built IAM, an intelligent agreement management platform that takes the entire, like applying in an AI-first way, the entire agreement life cycle, whether you are creating agreements, gen AI helps a lot with that, whether you're negotiating to

  8. 2:52

    understanding and redlining, all the way to after signing, storing, and making a lot of insights from this data. So when you think about the challenges involved, right, in an agreement, there is the unstructured data. It could be a PDF, it could be a PNG, and what are people wanting to do is simple questions. They can't get that. That is the data that is trapped inside one agreement, but also the whole corpus of millions of agreement, ten years, twenty years

  9. 3:22

    of business ha- has kind of put into that. So for a- agreements aren't flat. They're also hierarchical in nature. They are... Like, you know, one agreement governs the other, the other kind of does something else. So you always are needing lot of things to answer this question. Simple thing. I'm sure you all are using a lot of, right, Claude and all, especially at your company's organization. Simple thing. What did we contract for the total tokens, right, with Claude? No one knows. That's captured inside this agreement in different forms and fashion.

  10. 3:52

    So you need to be extracting this data to find things, but also insights and push it downstream where you're tracking, doing more things. And when you analyze an enterprise contract, a big set of things are captured, what I call vital terms like pricing tiers, the SKUs, the information, SLAs, rate cards. They're all in table format. Now, traditional document extraction tools or a generic VL- VM- VLM's completely fail here. Like, you know, we've tried, we've definitely done

  11. 4:22

    this. Because they're reading text line by line, which breaks a lot of that concept within the table. A merged cells, some things are not boundaried. So this makes a massive operational overhead for the downstream legal teams, procurement teams, sales teams to get that queries and get that answers done, and they spend hours and hours digging through this, um, to even just locate a basic thing. And that's kind of where we partnered with NVIDIA and leveraged a purpose-built model, like, you know, tool,

  12. 4:52

    which is really es- like, you know, making our architecture for table extraction take us to make and solve these complex use cases. So we're try... With this, we are making things scalable. We can understand it with the layout, but also deliver really accurate results. And to share more about how we are leveraging the Nemotron, I'm gonna hand it to Sean.

  13. 5:17

    All right. Hello, everyone. Uh, so real quick on, uh, the, uh, Nemotron Retriever initiative. So for those... Who here knows about Nemotron? Maybe raise your hand real quick. Awesome. Uh, so Nemotron is all about building world-class open source models and publishing the datasets, the techniques, uh, the quantization approaches, distillation approaches, pruning approaches, every technique possible, blueprints to go with that, you name it. Um, through then, throughout the Nemotron portfolio, we have specifically Nemotron Retriever, which is building embedding models,

  14. 5:47

    re-ranking models, and document extraction models. Um, so real quick here, we-- sort of our first initiative is if you're a large-scale enterprise that deals with petabyte-scale data, our first initiative is how do we make sure that you find the right document given a certain query, your agent sends, you know, a set of queries to the corpus afterwards. Once you find those top five quer-- uh, documents, whatever it may be, then we say, "Okay, you found the right document. Now how do you then find the right information within the document?" And this is where the work with the DocuSign team has gone really great, where

  15. 6:17

    we've, uh, worked with them to build the Nemotron parse model to focus specifically on table extraction, which is a really complicated technique. Um, if you think about it, the number of permutations of tables are quite vast when you think about nested tables, merged cells, merged columns, merged rows, whatever it may be, and that can get really, really complex and really hairy of a problem. Uh, so real quick, as I mentioned before, right? Our team is responsible for b-- uh, leading a lot of the leaderboards in the retrieval space. So ViDORI V1, V2, V3, MTEB, MMTEB. Um, so our

  16. 6:47

    team knows how to build world-class retrieval models given a lot of leadership w- uh, given a lot of leaderboard winnings that we've had in the last year or so. And then, of course, as I mentioned before, we open source everything, right? So we share the open source model weights, the techniques, and then we release with those blueprints and skills that agents can use then afterwards. Um, so to touch a little bit on the actual model that we are working with for DocuSign was the Nemotron parse model. So when you think VLM, you generally think a multi-billion parameter model. It's very heavy. It's high

  17. 7:16

    latency. Um, this is a very small, tiny C radio VLM. It's about eight hundred and fifty, nine hundred million parameter model, uh, designed to kind of be that all-in-one package sort of model where you deploy it, and instead of having small, let's say, YOLOX models that do table extraction or page element extraction or whatever it may be, this is a single-shot model that you can feed a document in and out comes the semantic formatting layouts, the text, uh, the reading order, uh, the, the preserved structure of the

  18. 7:46

    table, et cetera. Um, this can be served via the NVIDIA NIM or via vLLM as well too. Um, and it's-- so it's a tiny small model that you can use. It's not a generator. It's more of an extractor at the end of the day.

  19. 7:59

    Uh, so real quick as well too, um, we always wanna make sure that we're building towards benchmarks that matter most to the enterprise space. So we wanna make sure that both on the Pareto curve of accuracy versus performance, we'll make sure that we're gonna be releasing world-class models to the ecosystem too. So what you'll see here generally is just a very standard benchmark of table extraction. I believe this one was RD Table Bench. And we compare the-- some popular open source models here, and then we compare how our Nemotron parse model does compare to that industry, and we continue to kind of strive to improve this as time goes on.

  20. 8:30

    So that'll-- I think we believe we have a demo as well.

  21. 8:32

    Yeah.

  22. 8:33

    So how does I-

  23. 8:34

    You just press one... Yeah.

  24. 8:35

    Okay, there we go.

  25. 8:36

    Let me show you how easy it is to turn any agreement into structured, usable data with Agreement Manager, which is a central repository of every agreement an organization has ever signed. Let's look at this. So when we look at the Agreement Manager view here, you know, we have an ability to see the entire list of agreements, but also go and upload a new agreement. So I'm uploading a new order form into Agreement Manager. As you can see, I can select from a computer, import from

  26. 9:06

    other places. The moment I select the agreement, it starts uploading and starts processing with AI. And just like that, you can see that the jobs engine has processed it. Let's take a closer look at this agreement. So when you go into the action, you can go and browse the file. Within seconds, Agreement Manager has extracted a rich set of metadata. Everything from key terms to commercial details are automatically structured, highlighted, and immediately you can jump

  27. 9:36

    to that section where the details are found. Built-in goes deeper. This is where the NVIDIA's model comes in, that it's extracted all the structured pricing data around this agreement. It goes in, breaks down these complex tab-tables into order details. And as you can see, we can break it down. We can download all of this data. This is powered by the advanced parsing leveraging NVIDIA's Nemotron model, turning every--

  28. 10:06

    even dense tables into something that is instantly usable. And of course, you can take this data with you. You can see when we've downloaded into CSV how we've structured all of it for your finance team, procurement team, even further analysis. All of it is also available through API. And that's how Agreement Manager has transformed agreements into actionable insights in seconds leveraging NVIDIA. So I think, you know, what you saw there from, um, a demo perspective, we've tried to shortened it. It's like we

  29. 10:36

    have a whole repository. What you see a list, we get customers which has thousand agreements to all the way millions of agreements within. But the big piece is how do we understand and get that data that makes it very valuable to an end business user, right? A legal person, a procurement person, a salesperson who's doing a lot of the deals, or even a leader, right? Like a business unit. The CTO goes and asks, "What did we do?" This is how we are making each of the things a lot more structured. So we have our own proprietary agreement data model, which we are

  30. 11:06

    structurizing each agreement, but also at a whole organization level. And leveraging a lot of the NVIDIA things, we've been able to do a really good job, especially with all of those tables, like pricing, SLAs, and then make that available. And then we also have a, like, robust kind of search that is, um, on top of it. So when you think about what have we learned, right? When you think from a Nemotron plus Docusign, we-- one of the biggest things for us, we definitely have done lot of different models for different purposes.

  31. 11:36

    So purpose-built model for the job you're trying to do is a big, big part of how we've been thinking about, and that's kind of where we've been able to accelerate, bring things to market much faster. The second big piece around, like, the model efficiency. So for, you know, as Sean was talking about, the number of parameters, yes, context and stuff matters in the, you know, in a different environment for different things. For us, the lower kind of context basically also meant lower latency, lower cost to deliver the scale that we are

  32. 12:06

    talking about. Last, around the faster extraction. So, um, we d- we ran this against a lot of the other open source models. When you think about how many tables can it extract per seconds, Nemotron was twenty x faster, which helps us when we're talking about the millions and billions of scale that we're kind of serving for all of our customers. So a lot of it is, like, having that smaller purpose-built things is m-- the way for an enterprise as an

  33. 12:35

    organization to go and leverage and then serve that from an end user perspective. Um, and then what's next? So I'll let Sean talk through those.

  34. 12:45

    Yeah. So working with the Docusign team, uh, has been awesome so far. Uh, and we're gonna continue to deepen that partnership as well over the next few months. So, uh, with them, we started with the, how do I extract as much possible information from a page, and now we'll scale to how do I now find that page to begin with. Um, so we'll start a little bit with the Nemotron, NeMo Retriever, uh, effort, and then, of course, we'll talk a little bit about the NVIDIA Agent Toolkit with them over the next few months, um, and then actually start scaling into, into more production scale agents then.

  35. 13:12

    Perfect. I think that's what we had. We have time for a couple questions, anyone in the room.

  36. 13:22

    Okay. Have someone there.

  37. 13:24

    It seems like the, uh, OCR is, uh, a bottle already decided when you guys were thinking of basically cut that out of the loop and building an agentic structure from the get-go moving forward so that basically only the core relevant structure remains.

  38. 13:45

    So just to recap for everybody, if you didn't hear, it was-- the question is, right, like, OCR is always a thorn in the whole process, so are we thinking about letting the go of that and starting from agentic from the get-go? I can talk from my perspective. So I think for us, right, like, there are different use cases at different points in time. Many times, if you are reactive, you have a question and you're coming, some of that can, uh, can, can work dynamically at a smaller scale. The question is the latency. When I am querying at that scale of thousands, I do

  39. 14:14

    need to have preprocessed, have identified, so that's one. I think the second big part of the use case for us, a lot of times businesses want to use this data to do a lot of downstream work. So an example is a procurement team. This is my pricing table. I wanna put it into Coupa to make sure when I'm paying that works. At that time, there i-- like, you know, the agent is kind of helping, but I can't do that on a one document by document. That said, there is ways that we are compressing. That's kind of why Nemotron worked for us, is like, how do you do it from a layout understanding just for that

  40. 14:44

    purpose? But I would let, let you add.

  41. 14:47

    Yeah. I think it depends on the use case a little bit. Um, I think for this specific instance, right, you have petabytes of documents that you want to be queryable at some point, right? So you are heavy on the compute at the upfront side with all the OCR, so you don't have to worry about it later on, right? Then there's some instances where people may upload a contract to begin with for Q&A, and that's a very high-- that's a very low latency use case, right? So you have a high throughput versus low latency use case. And in that scenario, your different batch sizes, your concurrencies, your different techniques on how you process the document will be different. And where you

  42. 15:17

    spend that compute in that cycle will be changing between the different use cases.

  43. 15:22

    Okay. One more there. Yeah.

  44. 15:24

    I have a similar question. So next, how this solution replace YOLOX OCR tool since it's able to just extract new document. How, uh-

  45. 15:35

    We, we do a lot of, like, more of what I call hybrid approach at a purpose-built for, like, the needs and the use cases. So from a table piece, it does kind of, you know, do the whole layout along with extracting. We still do OCR from a lot of other fields and metadata in the clauses, like all of the text kind of thing. So we-- the-- I think we had a architecture where we have a pipeline going through two different routes for that. Um, as a follow-up, we have a blog out there. How are we really solving this at scale across? And if you look at that, there's a lot of different piecemeal

  46. 16:05

    modules and stuff together. Yeah, one more. At last.

  47. 16:09

    Uh, at scale, what quantization techniques are you using with the Nemotron model?

  48. 16:14

    So we-- this model is currently on FP16, but there are paths towards going on to FP8 and then FP4 in the next few months as well too.

  49. 16:22

    What about the Docusign? Are you, like, using the sixteen or are you quantizing down?

  50. 16:26

    We do use that, and then we are also kind of using some of the older ones, and that's the journey as a partnership, is to kind of go tweak as you get more of the customers in.

  51. 16:34

    Yeah. So for this, there are many techniques on how to improve the performance side, right? So quantization, right? So we're trying to move everyone to Blackwell, right? So that's why NVFP4 is the big thing now. Um, as well as, uh, multi-token generation for this. It's a VLM architecture, right? So your encoder-decoder techniques can definitely be further optimized. So not right now, this model just generates one token at a time. You can do multi-token generation, of course, too. So there's plenty of performance things. Right now we're focusing on the accuracy side. Like, are we adding value to the system? And then from there, we'll then push out that Pareto curve on the performance side.

  52. 17:05

    Are you guys using, like, the, the category graphs on NVIDIA GPUs, or are you, like, primarily running through force?

  53. 17:14

    I believe they just deploy via vLLM directly.

  54. 17:16

    No, I've got one on the recall side. When you, when I actually... Like, when you did that demo and you asked the question, is that, like, is, is that graph to the embedding structure, is it using camera or are you just using brute force?

  55. 17:29

    Oh, th-this is just an extraction. This is not a retrieval.

  56. 17:32

    Yeah.

  57. 17:33

    Yeah.

  58. 17:33

    Oh.

  59. 17:33

    Yeah.

  60. 17:34

    Even when you're asking the question, was it a retrieval?

  61. 17:35

    It's coming from that agreement data that we've kind of extracted and stored.

  62. 17:42

    Yeah, maybe I can chat with you offline and how, like, we, our architecture kind of works fully as well.

  63. 17:49

    No, we're almost coming up on time there. Um, but I think that's kind of all we have. Um, happy to hang around, uh, in the back with more questions. Um, and good luck with a lot of your, uh, challenges with AI. So thank you.

  64. 18:01

    Thank you.