How to Find Strong Summary Coherence Measures? A Toolbox and a Comparative Study for Summary Coherence Measure Evaluation

Julius Steen, K. Markert
{"title":"How to Find Strong Summary Coherence Measures? A Toolbox and a Comparative Study for Summary Coherence Measure Evaluation","authors":"Julius Steen, K. Markert","doi":"10.48550/arXiv.2209.06517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Automatically evaluating the coherence of summaries is of great significance both to enable cost-efficient summarizer evaluation and as a tool for improving coherence by selecting high-scoring candidate summaries. While many different approaches have been suggested to model summary coherence, they are often evaluated using disparate datasets and metrics. This makes it difficult to understand their relative performance and identify ways forward towards better summary coherence modelling. In this work, we conduct a large-scale investigation of various methods for summary coherence modelling on an even playing field. Additionally, we introduce two novel analysis measures, _intra-system correlation_ and _bias matrices_, that help identify biases in coherence measures and provide robustness against system-level confounders. While none of the currently available automatic coherence measures are able to assign reliable coherence scores to system summaries across all evaluation metrics, large-scale language models fine-tuned on self-supervised tasks show promising results, as long as fine-tuning takes into account that they need to generalize across different summary lengths.","PeriodicalId":91381,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of COLING. International Conference on Computational Linguistics","volume":"1 1","pages":"6035-6049"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of COLING. International Conference on Computational Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.06517","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Automatically evaluating the coherence of summaries is of great significance both to enable cost-efficient summarizer evaluation and as a tool for improving coherence by selecting high-scoring candidate summaries. While many different approaches have been suggested to model summary coherence, they are often evaluated using disparate datasets and metrics. This makes it difficult to understand their relative performance and identify ways forward towards better summary coherence modelling. In this work, we conduct a large-scale investigation of various methods for summary coherence modelling on an even playing field. Additionally, we introduce two novel analysis measures, _intra-system correlation_ and _bias matrices_, that help identify biases in coherence measures and provide robustness against system-level confounders. While none of the currently available automatic coherence measures are able to assign reliable coherence scores to system summaries across all evaluation metrics, large-scale language models fine-tuned on self-supervised tasks show promising results, as long as fine-tuning takes into account that they need to generalize across different summary lengths.
如何找到较强的总结一致性度量?摘要相干测度评价的工具箱与比较研究
摘要的连贯性自动评估对于提高摘要评估的成本效益和通过选择高分候选摘要来提高摘要的连贯性具有重要意义。虽然已经提出了许多不同的方法来建模摘要一致性,但它们通常使用不同的数据集和指标进行评估。这使得很难理解它们的相对性能,并确定朝着更好的总结相干建模前进的方法。在这项工作中,我们对在一个公平的竞争环境中进行总结相干建模的各种方法进行了大规模的调查。此外,我们还引入了两种新的分析度量,即系统内相关性和偏差矩阵,它们有助于识别相干度量中的偏差,并提供对系统级混杂因素的鲁棒性。虽然目前没有一个可用的自动一致性度量能够在所有评估度量中为系统摘要分配可靠的一致性分数,但是在自我监督任务上进行微调的大规模语言模型显示出有希望的结果,只要微调考虑到它们需要在不同的摘要长度上进行泛化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信