We performed a comparison between HyperScience and IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Has algorithms that can detect a document template even if the image has a lot of distortions."
"One of the most valuable features of HyperScience is the user-training module. Whenever the extraction takes place, based on the way we have trained HyperScience, it would give us some success status or a certain confidence level. If the solution has processed something that it determined was not extracted correctly it will queue those items for manual review."
"We have seen pretty good accuracy."
"Valuable features include tools like IQ Bot and the ability to extract handwritten documents with 93-95 per cent accuracy."
"I like that compared to other tools, HyperScience works best with handwritten documents."
"What I liked more about HyperScience was the quality of the OCR it is a lot better compared to Google."
"It provides the best accuracy for handwritten forms, which is a struggle in the industry. You can take processes with a lot of manual work and streamline them through this tool."
"The feature I found most valuable is the TCO."
"It's integrated with all the other products within the Salesforce ecosystem."
"It is a good tool for automation."
"The solution's ease of use is its most valuable aspect."
"If you have a business process, and once you have automated that process, you have a readily available workflow in place."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"IBM RPA helped us resolve a lot of difficult cases we could not resolve using other solutions."
"The good stuff about IBM is the fact that it's very easy to use, there are very nice and smart AI tools within the licensing that you don't have to pay any access. Moreover, it's more precise and more secure."
"No solution is perfect and there are several different scenarios that could be improved in HyperScience. One area is where there are multiple tables in the same form I have seen HyperScience struggle. There is some issue with supporting the extraction from multiple tables involved on the same form. If this could improve, it would be a big benefit."
"The solution lacks support for a greater range of languages."
"HyperScience could improve the unstructured data extraction feature."
"They could work on the price and make it a bit more reasonable."
"HyperScience has less capability while working on unstructured forms. Unstructured forms are those where there is no standard structure and the information can be anywhere on the form. They need to develop this capability."
"Extracting tables from certain documents could be improved."
"The product's usability could be better. The first pain point is that we're getting the output in a different format, and we were expecting a different timetable. The second point is that if you want better results, HyperScience says you have to configure a minimal PDF or a maximum of 400 PDFs. If you want results with 400 PDFs for what's written by these doctors, then you also configure the maximum of 400 templates for that. So, it's essentially a lack of support from HyperScience. In the next release, it would be better if failure scenarios were reduced. It would also help if they offered different formats, inputs or injections, and added different scenarios."
"Capturing GUI operations is very easy, but capturing IBM Logistics automation is hard. It does not always work with browsers or automotive applications like SAP."
"The users should be allowed to create folders in Control Center."
"Stability could be better."
"IBM’s support should improve response time."
"Needs better integration with artificial intelligence or with machine-learning."
"One of the things I would definitely like to see is more of the machine-learning and cognitive capabilities. For example, now that we're starting to automate more and more tasks, there are some things that still require us to go back and modify the robots when we need to. But if we had more of the machine-learning integrated into it, I believe it would be easier to maintain, so that we wouldn't have to go back and adjust every time."
"Extensibility is the key, especially in terms of the Recorders feature that we have. That should be browser independent. Enhance it because some people have Chrome, some have Internet Explorer, etc. Also, integration with PDFs: Not just the ability to read information from PDFs but the ability to write information from PDFs, make it secure, sign it, etc. Finally, if they can allow a token exchange inside the tool itself, that would help."
"IBM Robotic Process Automation should be more stable."
More IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) Pricing and Cost Advice →
HyperScience is ranked 6th in Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) with 7 reviews while IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is ranked 8th in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 23 reviews. HyperScience is rated 7.6, while IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HyperScience writes "It has a lot of functionality, whatever we use, but a few things could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) writes "User-friendly interface and good stability". HyperScience is most compared with ABBYY Vantage, UiPath, Instabase, Microsoft Power Automate and Tungsten RPA, whereas IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is most compared with UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Automation Anywhere (AA), Blue Prism and IPsoft 1RPA. See our HyperScience vs. IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) report.
See our list of best Robotic Process Automation (RPA) vendors.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.