Re-evaluating Evaluation in Text Summarization
원문 초록
Automated evaluation metrics as a stand-in for manual evaluation are an essential part of the development of text-generation tasks such as text summarization. However, while the field has progressed, our standard metrics have not -- for nearly 20 years ROUGE has been the standard evaluation in most summarization papers. In this paper, we make an attempt to re-evaluate the evaluation method for text summarization: assessing the reliability of automatic metrics using top-scoring system outputs, both abstractive and extractive, on recently popular datasets for both system-level and summary-level evaluation settings. We find that conclusions about evaluation metrics on older datasets do not necessarily hold on modern datasets and systems.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
ConTextual: Improving Clinical Text Summarization in LLMs with Context-preserving Token Filtering and Knowledge Graphs
MaCP: Minimal yet Mighty Adaptation via Hierarchical Cosine Projection
DeepSeek vs. o3-mini: How Well can Reasoning LLMs Evaluate MT and Summarization?
APE: Selective Fine-tuning with Acceptance Criteria for Language Model Adaptation
Making Language Model a Hierarchical Classifier and Generator
Mitigating Object Hallucinations via Sentence-Level Early Intervention
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.