Recommendation for Extraction

Structured Data Extraction

The best LLM for structured data extraction in this evidence-weighted comparison is Google: Gemini 3.6 Flash.[1][2] Still suitable for feature extraction pipelines where sub-percent accuracy tradeoffs are acceptable. Meta: Muse Spark 1.1 is the next-ranked alternative. Blind human votes place it competitively among peers, suggesting acceptable output formatting reliability.

About this recommendation

Updated
Jul 22, 2026
Evidence through
Jul 22, 2026
Sources
2
Revision
v4
  1. 01

    Google: Gemini 3.6 Flash

    Shows measurable regression from its predecessor on feature extraction workloads but remains viable for structured output tasks.

    Best when: Still suitable for feature extraction pipelines where sub-percent accuracy tradeoffs are acceptable.

    Tips

    • Still suitable for feature extraction pipelines where sub-percent accuracy tradeoffs are acceptable.
      Source 1
      “Spent half an hour just now benchmarking it against my current 3.5 Flash pipeline excited only see it regressed slightly (0.1% - 0.2% at most, for feature extraction work) Seems like this is mostly a cost play by Google, hoping this doesn't bring 3.5 Flash capabilities to an end of life, and that 3.6 catches up or gets better.”
      hmokiguessOpen original ↗
  2. 02

    Meta: Muse Spark 1.1

    Mid-tier human preference ranking suggests general competence but provides no direct extraction validation.

    Best when: Blind human votes place it competitively among peers, suggesting acceptable output formatting reliability.

    Tips

    • Blind human votes place it competitively among peers, suggesting acceptable output formatting reliability.
      Source 2
      “Ranks #7 of 17 on LMArena's overall text arena (Elo 1491), based on blind human preference votes.”
      LMArena text arenaOpen original ↗

    Watch out for

    • No structured extraction benchmarks or behavior cited; preference rankings may not correlate with JSON adherence.
      Source 2
      “Ranks #7 of 17 on LMArena's overall text arena (Elo 1491), based on blind human preference votes.”
      LMArena text arenaOpen original ↗

Frequently asked

What is the top-ranked model for structured data extraction?
Google: Gemini 3.6 Flash ranks first in the current evidence-weighted comparison. Still suitable for feature extraction pipelines where sub-percent accuracy tradeoffs are acceptable.[1]
What is an alternative to Google: Gemini 3.6 Flash?
Meta: Muse Spark 1.1 is the next-ranked option. Blind human votes place it competitively among peers, suggesting acceptable output formatting reliability.[2]

Sources

  1. 1

    “Spent half an hour just now benchmarking it against my current 3.5 Flash pipeline excited only see it regressed slightly (0.1% - 0.2% at most, for feature extraction work) Seems like this is mostly a cost play by Google, hoping this doesn't bring 3.5 Flash capabilities to an end of life, and that 3.6 catches up or gets better.”

    hmokiguess · Hacker News · Jul 21, 2026
  2. 2

    “Ranks #7 of 17 on LMArena's overall text arena (Elo 1491), based on blind human preference votes.”

    LMArena text arena · Benchmark · Jul 20, 2026

Rankings synthesized from community evidence and open benchmarks. See methodology. Not driven by vendor marketing.