Challenge: Prior work has shown that models may exploit shortcuts that are difficult to detect using standard n-gram similarity metrics such as ROUGE.
Approach: They propose to use human-assessed summary quality facets and pairwise preferences to improve MDS evaluation methods.
Outcome: The proposed methods improve the quality of literature review summarization models . they use human-assessed summary quality facets and pairwise preferences .

Similar Papers

Corpora Evaluation and System Bias Detection in Multi-document Summarization (2020.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Multi-document summarization (MDS) is a task of combining multiple documents into a concise text paragraph.
Approach: They propose to use a multi-document summarization task to reflect key points from any set of documents into a concise text paragraph.
Outcome: The proposed system performs better on a set of selected datasets than on the other ones.
Re-Examining Summarization Evaluation across Multiple Quality Criteria (2023.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: a number of automated evaluation metrics are evaluated by multiple quality criteria, such as relevance, consistency, fluency and coherence.
Approach: They propose a method that removes the confounding variable and detects unreliable correlations.
Outcome: The proposed method detects unreliable correlations between QCs and human scores . it is based on a multi-QC setup, but it fails to detect summary corruptions .
The patient is more dead than alive: exploring the current state of the multi-document summarisation of the biomedical literature (2022.acl-long)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing evaluation approaches to multi-document summarization of biomedical literature lack consistency and transparency.
Approach: They propose a systematic approach to human evaluation of biomedical summaries and apply it to analyze the summary generated by two current evaluation models.
Outcome: The proposed evaluation framework is based on two state-of-the-art models and examines the summaries generated by the two models to understand the deficiencies of existing evaluation approaches.
Studying Summarization Evaluation Metrics in the Appropriate Scoring Range (P19-1)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing evaluation metrics are compared based on their ability to correlate with humans, but they disagree in the higher-scoring range in which current systems operate.
Approach: They show that evaluation metrics which behave similarly on these datasets strongly disagree in the higher-scoring range in which current systems operate.
Outcome: The evaluation metrics which behave similarly on these datasets strongly disagree in the higher-scoring range in which current systems operate.
Multi Document Summarization Evaluation in the Presence of Damaging Content (2023.findings-emnlp)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing metrics evaluate a summary based on relevance and consistency with the source documents.
Approach: They propose to measure the ability of MDS systems to handle damaging documents in their input set by lexical similarity and language model likelihood.
Outcome: The proposed metrics show that they can summarize a set of documents without damaging content.
How “Multi” is Multi-Document Summarization? (2022.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Multi-document summarization (MDS) aims at combining information spread across multiple documents . a single document often covers the full summary content .
Approach: They propose a measure to evaluate the degree to which a summary is "disperse" they propose to combine information from multiple documents into a single document to generate a concise summary .
Outcome: The proposed measure evaluates the degree to which a summary is "disperse" the measure is applied to several popular MDS datasets and state-of-the-art systems.
An Investigation of Evaluation Methods in Automatic Medical Note Generation (2023.findings-acl)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Recent studies show that doctors can save significant amounts of time when using automatic note generation.
Approach: They propose task-specific metrics for automatic note generation from medical conversation summarization and generation, including knowledge-graph embedding-based metrics, customized model-based measures with domain-specific weights, and ensemble metrics.
Outcome: The proposed evaluation metrics are compared to existing models and can have different behaviors on different types of clinical notes datasets.
Re-Evaluating Evaluation for Multilingual Summarization (2024.emnlp-main)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing studies have shown that automated evaluation approaches correlate with human ratings in English, but this is unclear for other languages.
Approach: They construct a small-scale pilot dataset containing article-summary pairs and human ratings in English, Chinese and Indonesian to measure the strength of summaries.
Outcome: The results show that standard metrics are unreliable measures of quality in Chinese and Indonesian.
A Data Set for the Analysis of Text Quality Dimensions in Summarization Evaluation (2020.lrec-1)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: Existing methods for summarization evaluation focus on a metric to represent the quality of the text, but they focus on only a few quality dimensions.
Approach: They analyze the depen-dencies between various quality dimensions on automatically created multi-document summaries and which are best suited for summarization.
Outcome: The proposed method achieves higher quality summaries than other methods on a large-scale heterogeneous data set.
SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluation (2021.tacl-1)

Copied to clipboard

Challenge: a lack of comprehensive studies on evaluation metrics for text summarization hinders progress . a new study aims to improve evaluation metrics that correlate with human judgments .
Approach: They propose to re-evaluate automatic evaluation metrics and share a toolkit for evaluation . they hope to promote a more complete evaluation protocol for text summarization .
Outcome: The proposed evaluation metrics are inconsistent with existing evaluation protocols.

What is GenGO?

GenGO is an NLP powered publication search system. It currenctly indexes 30k+ papers from ACL Anthology, and implements multi-aspect summarization, semantic search, and more!

Information

About
Limitations