Factual Dialogue Summarization via Learning from Large Language Models (2025.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing models generate fluent and coherent summaries, but inconsistencies can be found in generated summary. |
| Approach: | They propose to use symbolic knowledge distillation to improve the factual consistency of smaller pretrained models for dialogue summarization. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model outperforms baseline models in BART, PEGASUS, and Flan-T5 in factual consistency and accuracy. |
Similar Papers
Exploring the Factual Consistency in Dialogue Comprehension of Large Language Models (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | LLMs generate responses following user's instructions, which requires high dialogue comprehension ability. |
| Approach: | They propose to evaluate LLMs' dialogue comprehension ability using a dialogue summarization task to derive factual questions from the generated summaries and use them as a more flexible measurement of dialogue comprehension. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model reduces the error rate by 11% on the dialogue summarization task. |
Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Abstractive Text Summarization (2020.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a weakly-supervised approach is needed to verify factual consistency . auxiliary span extraction tasks are useful for verifying factual consistent summaries . |
| Approach: | They propose a weakly-supervised approach for verifying factual consistency . they transfer the model to summaries generated by several neural models . |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach outperforms models trained with strong supervision on source documents and human evaluations. |
CONFIT: Toward Faithful Dialogue Summarization with Linguistically-Informed Contrastive Fine-tuning (2022.naacl-main)
Copied to clipboard
Xiangru Tang, Arjun Nair, Borui Wang, Bingyao Wang, Jai Desai, Aaron Wade, Haoran Li, Asli Celikyilmaz, Yashar Mehdad, Dragomir Radev
| Challenge: | Factual inconsistencies in generated summaries severely limit the practical applications of abstractive dialogue summarization. |
| Approach: | They propose a typology of factual errors to better understand hallucinations generated by current models and a contrastive fine-tuning strategy to improve the factual consistency and overall quality of summaries. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model significantly reduces all kinds of factual errors on both SAMSum dialogue summarization and AMI meeting summarizing datasets. |
Multilingual Summarization with Factual Consistency Evaluation (2023.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Abstractive summarization models generate factually inconsistent summaries, reducing their utility for real-world applications. |
| Approach: | They propose to use data filtering and controlled generation to detect hallucinations in machine generated summaries. |
| Outcome: | The proposed models detect factual inconsistencies in machine generated summaries, but they focus on English only. |
TrueTeacher: Learning Factual Consistency Evaluation with Large Language Models (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for evaluating factual consistency are limited in their effectiveness. |
| Approach: | They propose a method for generating synthetic data by annotating diverse model-generated summaries using a LLM. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms state-of-the-art models and the LLM teacher on TRUE benchmarks. |
SummaCoz: A Dataset for Improving the Interpretability of Factual Consistency Detection for Summarization (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Summarization is an important application of Large Language Models. |
| Approach: | They integrate human-annotated and model-generated natural language explanations to elucidate how a summary deviates and becomes inconsistent with its source article. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model provides rationales for its judgments and improves its accuracy significantly. |
Masked Summarization to Generate Factually Inconsistent Summaries for Improved Factual Consistency Checking (2022.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Abstractive summarization systems generate paraphrases, but they often contain information inconsistent with the source text. |
| Approach: | They propose to generate factually inconsistent summaries using source texts and reference summary with key information masked to train a factual consistency classifier. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms existing models and shows a competitive correlation with human judgments. |
Evaluating the Factual Consistency of Large Language Models Through News Summarization (2023.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing LLMs generally assign a higher score to factually consistent summaries than to factualally inconsistent summary. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to measure whether large language models prefer factually consistent continuations of inputs. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark compares the scores an LLM assigns to a factually consistent versus a inconsistent summary for an input news article. |
SWING: Balancing Coverage and Faithfulness for Dialogue Summarization (2023.findings-eacl)
Copied to clipboard
Kung-Hsiang Huang, Siffi Singh, Xiaofei Ma, Wei Xiao, Feng Nan, Nicholas Dingwall, William Yang Wang, Kathleen McKeown
| Challenge: | Existing approaches to dialogue summarization rely on features of conversation data. |
| Approach: | They propose to use natural language inference models to improve coverage and faithfulness . they use fine-grained training signals to encourage model to generate missing content . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model achieves higher faithfulness and coverage while maintaining conciseness compared to prior methods. |
CLIFF: Contrastive Learning for Improving Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarization (2021.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for generating abstractive summarization are inconsistent and rely on heuristically created data for error handling. |
| Approach: | They propose a contrastive learning formulation that leverages both positive and negative summaries to train summarization systems that are better at distinguishing between them. |
| Outcome: | The proposed learning framework produces more factual summaries than strong comparisons with post error correction, entailment-based reranking, and unlikelihood training. |