Summarization Evaluation in the Absence of Human Model Summaries Using the Compositionality of Word Embeddings (C18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing summary evaluation methods rely on multiple model summaries to evaluate quality of summary outputs. |
| Approach: | They propose a new summary evaluation approach that does not require human model summaries . they exploit compositional capabilities of word embeddings to develop features . |
| Outcome: | The proposed metric replicates human-generated summarization scores on data from TAC 2008 and 2009 . the features are then used to train a learning model for predicting the summary content quality in the absence of gold models. |
Similar Papers
SummEval: Re-evaluating Summarization Evaluation (2021.tacl-1)
Copied to clipboard
Alexander R. Fabbri, Wojciech Kryściński, Bryan McCann, Caiming Xiong, Richard Socher, Dragomir Radev
| 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 Have We Achieved on Text Summarization? (2020.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for text summarization have been investigated, but there are still gaps between them and human professionals. |
| Approach: | They analyze 8 major sources of errors on 10 representative summarization models manually. |
| Outcome: | Aiming to gain more understanding of summarization systems with respect to their strengths and limitations on a fine-grained syntactic and semantic level, we use 8 major sources of errors on 10 representative summarizing models. |
Revisiting the Gold Standard: Grounding Summarization Evaluation with Robust Human Evaluation (2023.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Yixin Liu, Alex Fabbri, Pengfei Liu, Yilun Zhao, Linyong Nan, Ruilin Han, Simeng Han, Shafiq Joty, Chien-Sheng Wu, Caiming Xiong, Dragomir Radev
| Challenge: | Existing studies for summarization evaluation exhibit low inter-annotator agreement or lack scale. |
| Approach: | They propose a modified summarization salience protocol based on fine-grained semantic units and a robust summarizing evaluation benchmark. |
| Outcome: | The proposed protocol is based on fine-grained semantic units and allows for high inter-annotator agreement. |
Unsupervised Reference-Free Summary Quality Evaluation via Contrastive Learning (2020.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for document summarization consider the informativeness of the assessed summary and require human-generated references for each test summary. |
| Approach: | They propose to evaluate summary qualities without reference summaries by unsupervised contrastive learning. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms other evaluation metrics even without reference summaries. |
How to Find Strong Summary Coherence Measures? A Toolbox and a Comparative Study for Summary Coherence Measure Evaluation (2022.coling-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods to evaluate summary coherence are often evaluated using disparate datasets and metrics. |
| Approach: | They propose to use automatic evaluation to evaluate coherence of summaries by selecting high-scoring candidates. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods show that they can perform better on an even playing field. |
PreSumm: Predicting Summarization Performance Without Summarizing (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent advances in summarization models do not produce all documents in the same way, despite their inherent design principles and operational mechanisms. |
| Approach: | They propose a task where a system predicts summarization performance based solely on the source document. |
| Outcome: | The proposed task identifies documents that require manual summarization and improves dataset quality by filtering outliers and noisy documents. |
Content Selection in Deep Learning Models of Summarization (D18-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Using deep learning models, we find that word embedding does not improve performance over simpler models. |
| Approach: | They propose to use sentence embedding to perform content selection across multiple domains . they propose to propose two alternative models that use auto-regressive sentence extraction . |
| Outcome: | The proposed models improve performance across news, personal stories, meetings, and medical articles. |
How Far are We from Robust Long Abstractive Summarization? (2022.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Abstractive summarization has made tremendous progress in recent years . however, even under a short document setting, abstractive models often generate summaries that are repetitive, ungrammatical, and factually inconsistent with the source. |
| Approach: | They perform fine-grained human annotations to evaluate long document abstractive summarization systems and develop factual consistency metrics. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can generate more relevant summaries but not factual ones. |
HighRES: Highlight-based Reference-less Evaluation of Summarization (P19-1)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for summarizing documents are inconsistent due to the difficulty of manual evaluation. |
| Approach: | They propose a method where summaries are evaluated by multiple annotators against the source document via manually highlighted salient content. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method improves inter-annotator agreement while highlighting differences among systems. |
Is Summary Useful or Not? An Extrinsic Human Evaluation of Text Summaries on Downstream Tasks (2024.lrec-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a recent study focused on intrinsic evaluation, which assesses the quality of summaries, e.g. coherence, fluency, and informativeness, but it focused on task-based extrinsic evaluation to determine the usefulness of summarizations. |
| Approach: | They incorporate three downstream tasks to measure the usefulness of summaries . they find that fine-tuned models produce more useful summary across all three tasks . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model produces more useful summaries across all three tasks compared to zero-shot models . human evaluation provides more reliable performance assessment compared with automatic methods . |