Yue Guo, Tal August, Gondy Leroy, Trevor Cohen, Lucy Lu Wang
{"title":"APPLS:评估简单语言总结的评估指标。","authors":"Yue Guo, Tal August, Gondy Leroy, Trevor Cohen, Lucy Lu Wang","doi":"10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While there has been significant development of models for Plain Language Summarization (PLS), evaluation remains a challenge. PLS lacks a dedicated assessment metric, and the suitability of text generation evaluation metrics is unclear due to the unique transformations involved (e.g., adding background explanations, removing jargon). To address these questions, our study introduces a granular meta-evaluation testbed, APPLS, designed to evaluate metrics for PLS. We identify four PLS criteria from previous work-informativeness, simplification, coherence, and faithfulness-and define a set of perturbations corresponding to these criteria that sensitive metrics should be able to detect. We apply these perturbations to the texts of two PLS datasets to create our testbed. Using APPLS, we assess performance of 14 metrics, including automated scores, lexical features, and LLM prompt-based evaluations. Our analysis reveals that while some current metrics show sensitivity to specific criteria, no single method captures all four criteria simultaneously. We therefore recommend a suite of automated metrics be used to capture PLS quality along all relevant criteria. This work contributes the first meta-evaluation testbed for PLS and a comprehensive evaluation of existing metrics.</p>","PeriodicalId":74540,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing","volume":"2024 ","pages":"9194-9211"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11938995/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"APPLS: Evaluating Evaluation Metrics for Plain Language Summarization.\",\"authors\":\"Yue Guo, Tal August, Gondy Leroy, Trevor Cohen, Lucy Lu Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.519\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>While there has been significant development of models for Plain Language Summarization (PLS), evaluation remains a challenge. PLS lacks a dedicated assessment metric, and the suitability of text generation evaluation metrics is unclear due to the unique transformations involved (e.g., adding background explanations, removing jargon). To address these questions, our study introduces a granular meta-evaluation testbed, APPLS, designed to evaluate metrics for PLS. We identify four PLS criteria from previous work-informativeness, simplification, coherence, and faithfulness-and define a set of perturbations corresponding to these criteria that sensitive metrics should be able to detect. We apply these perturbations to the texts of two PLS datasets to create our testbed. Using APPLS, we assess performance of 14 metrics, including automated scores, lexical features, and LLM prompt-based evaluations. Our analysis reveals that while some current metrics show sensitivity to specific criteria, no single method captures all four criteria simultaneously. We therefore recommend a suite of automated metrics be used to capture PLS quality along all relevant criteria. This work contributes the first meta-evaluation testbed for PLS and a comprehensive evaluation of existing metrics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74540,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing\",\"volume\":\"2024 \",\"pages\":\"9194-9211\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11938995/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.519\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2024.emnlp-main.519","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
APPLS: Evaluating Evaluation Metrics for Plain Language Summarization.
While there has been significant development of models for Plain Language Summarization (PLS), evaluation remains a challenge. PLS lacks a dedicated assessment metric, and the suitability of text generation evaluation metrics is unclear due to the unique transformations involved (e.g., adding background explanations, removing jargon). To address these questions, our study introduces a granular meta-evaluation testbed, APPLS, designed to evaluate metrics for PLS. We identify four PLS criteria from previous work-informativeness, simplification, coherence, and faithfulness-and define a set of perturbations corresponding to these criteria that sensitive metrics should be able to detect. We apply these perturbations to the texts of two PLS datasets to create our testbed. Using APPLS, we assess performance of 14 metrics, including automated scores, lexical features, and LLM prompt-based evaluations. Our analysis reveals that while some current metrics show sensitivity to specific criteria, no single method captures all four criteria simultaneously. We therefore recommend a suite of automated metrics be used to capture PLS quality along all relevant criteria. This work contributes the first meta-evaluation testbed for PLS and a comprehensive evaluation of existing metrics.