Reading is a judgement, not a certainty
Pulling a figure off a scanned receipt or a faxed bill of lading is never a certain act. Ink smudges, columns overlap, a decimal point sits ambiguously between two digits. Any honest reader — human or machine — is more sure of some fields than others.
A tool that flattens all of that into a single confident-looking answer is hiding the one thing you most need to know: which numbers to trust and which to look at twice. The uncertainty does not disappear when it goes unreported; it just becomes your problem, found later.
A score on every field
Docusift attaches a confidence score to each field it extracts, not to the document as a whole. The vendor name might come back near-certain while a hand-scrawled total sits low, and you see both, field by field, rather than one blanket verdict over the page.
That granularity is what makes the score useful. A single "this document is 80% good" tells you nothing about which 20% to check. A score per field points straight at the line that needs a human eye and leaves the rest to flow through untouched.
Review as a routing decision
The score is not decoration — it drives what happens next. Low-confidence values route to human review instead of landing unchecked in your ledger, so a person looks at exactly the fields that warrant it and nothing else clogs the queue.
This is what keeps automation honest. The goal was never to remove the human; it was to spend the human's attention where it actually changes the outcome. Docusift is live and accepting sign-ups, and the documents you send stay yours throughout — processed, returned, never resold.