feat: Expose equation exports (#869)

* pin new docling-core and exploit it via assembler changes

Signed-off-by: Michele Dolfi <dol@zurich.ibm.com>

* update test results

Signed-off-by: Michele Dolfi <dol@zurich.ibm.com>

* update with docling-core release

Signed-off-by: Michele Dolfi <dol@zurich.ibm.com>

---------

Signed-off-by: Michele Dolfi <dol@zurich.ibm.com>

tests/data/groundtruth/docling_v2/2206.01062.md

@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ In this paper, we present the DocLayNet dataset. It provides pageby-page layout
 
 This enables experimentation with annotation uncertainty and quality control analysis.
 
-- (5) Pre-defined Train-, Test- & Validation-set : Like DocBank, we provide fixed train-, test- & validation-sets to ensure proportional representation of the class-labels. Further, we prevent leakage of unique layouts across sets, which has a large effect on model accuracy scores.
+- (5) Pre-defined Train-, Test- & Validation-set : Like DocBank, we provide fixed train-, test- & validation-sets to ensure proportional representation of the class-labels. Further, we prevent leakage of unique layouts across sets, which has a large effect on model accuracy scores.
 
 All aspects outlined above are detailed in Section 3. In Section 4, we will elaborate on how we designed and executed this large-scale human annotation campaign. We will also share key insights and lessons learned that might prove helpful for other parties planning to set up annotation campaigns.
 
@@ -77,9 +77,9 @@ Figure 2: Distribution of DocLayNet pages across document categories.
 
 <!-- image -->
 
-to a minimum, since they introduce difficulties in annotation (see Section 4). As a second condition, we focussed on medium to large documents ( > 10 pages) with technical content, dense in complex tables, figures, plots and captions. Such documents carry a lot of information value, but are often hard to analyse with high accuracy due to their challenging layouts. Counterexamples of documents not included in the dataset are receipts, invoices, hand-written documents or photographs showing "text in the wild".
+to a minimum, since they introduce difficulties in annotation (see Section 4). As a second condition, we focussed on medium to large documents ( &gt; 10 pages) with technical content, dense in complex tables, figures, plots and captions. Such documents carry a lot of information value, but are often hard to analyse with high accuracy due to their challenging layouts. Counterexamples of documents not included in the dataset are receipts, invoices, hand-written documents or photographs showing "text in the wild".
 
-The pages in DocLayNet can be grouped into six distinct categories, namely Financial Reports , Manuals , Scientific Articles , Laws & Regulations , Patents and Government Tenders . Each document category was sourced from various repositories. For example, Financial Reports contain both free-style format annual reports 2 which expose company-specific, artistic layouts as well as the more formal SEC filings. The two largest categories ( Financial Reports and Manuals ) contain a large amount of free-style layouts in order to obtain maximum variability. In the other four categories, we boosted the variability by mixing documents from independent providers, such as different government websites or publishers. In Figure 2, we show the document categories contained in DocLayNet with their respective sizes.
+The pages in DocLayNet can be grouped into six distinct categories, namely Financial Reports , Manuals , Scientific Articles , Laws &amp; Regulations , Patents and Government Tenders . Each document category was sourced from various repositories. For example, Financial Reports contain both free-style format annual reports 2 which expose company-specific, artistic layouts as well as the more formal SEC filings. The two largest categories ( Financial Reports and Manuals ) contain a large amount of free-style layouts in order to obtain maximum variability. In the other four categories, we boosted the variability by mixing documents from independent providers, such as different government websites or publishers. In Figure 2, we show the document categories contained in DocLayNet with their respective sizes.
 
 We did not control the document selection with regard to language. The vast majority of documents contained in DocLayNet (close to 95%) are published in English language. However, DocLayNet also contains a number of documents in other languages such as German (2.5%), French (1.0%) and Japanese (1.0%). While the document language has negligible impact on the performance of computer vision methods such as object detection and segmentation models, it might prove challenging for layout analysis methods which exploit textual features.
 
@@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ In Table 2, we present baseline experiments (given in mAP) on Mask R-CNN [12], F
 
 Table 3: Performance of a Mask R-CNN R50 network in mAP@0.5-0.95 scores trained on DocLayNet with different class label sets. The reduced label sets were obtained by either down-mapping or dropping labels.
 
-Table 4: Performance of a Mask R-CNN R50 network with document-wise and page-wise split for different label sets. Naive page-wise split will result in GLYPH<tildelow> 10% point improvement.
+Table 4: Performance of a Mask R-CNN R50 network with document-wise and page-wise split for different label sets. Naive page-wise split will result in GLYPH&lt;tildelow&gt; 10% point improvement.
 
 | Class-count    |   11 | 6       | 5       | 4       |
 |----------------|------|---------|---------|---------|
@@ -243,7 +243,7 @@ Many documents in DocLayNet have a unique styling. In order to avoid overfitting
 
 Throughout this paper, we claim that DocLayNet's wider variety of document layouts leads to more robust layout detection models. In Table 5, we provide evidence for that. We trained models on each of the available datasets (PubLayNet, DocBank and DocLayNet) and evaluated them on the test sets of the other datasets. Due to the different label sets and annotation styles, a direct comparison is not possible. Hence, we focussed on the common labels among the datasets. Between PubLayNet and DocLayNet, these are Picture ,
 
-Table 5: Prediction Performance (mAP@0.5-0.95) of a Mask R-CNN R50 network across the PubLayNet, DocBank & DocLayNet data-sets. By evaluating on common label classes of each dataset, we observe that the DocLayNet-trained model has much less pronounced variations in performance across all datasets.
+Table 5: Prediction Performance (mAP@0.5-0.95) of a Mask R-CNN R50 network across the PubLayNet, DocBank &amp; DocLayNet data-sets. By evaluating on common label classes of each dataset, we observe that the DocLayNet-trained model has much less pronounced variations in performance across all datasets.
 
 |                 |            | Testing on   | Testing on   | Testing on   |
 |-----------------|------------|--------------|--------------|--------------|