How Much Annotation is Needed to Compare Summarization Models?
원문 초록
Modern instruction-tuned models have become highly capable in text generation tasks such as summarization, and are expected to be released at a steady pace. In practice one may now wish to choose confidently, but with minimal effort, the best performing summarization model when applied to a new domain or purpose. In this work, we empirically investigate the test sample size necessary to select a preferred model in the context of news summarization. Empirical results reveal that comparative evaluation converges quickly for both automatic and human evaluation, with clear preferences for a system emerging from under 100 examples. The human preference data allows us to quantify how well automatic scores can reproduce preference rankings across a variety of downstream summarization tasks. We find that, while automatic metrics are stable at smaller sample sizes, only some automatic metrics are able to moderately predict model win rates according to human preference.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
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
The Devil behind the mask: An emergent safety vulnerability of Diffusion LLMs
Hashed Watermark as a Filter: Defeating Forging and Overwriting Attacks in Weight-based Neural Network Watermarking
Seq vs Seq: An Open Suite of Paired Encoders and Decoders
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.