Pith. sign in

REVIEW

The Fewer Splits are Better: Deconstructing Readability in Sentence Splitting

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2302.00937 v1 pith:DGXE4ZEL submitted 2023-02-02 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords sentencereadabilitysplittingbayesiandegreelinguisticsmodelingparticular
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

In this work, we focus on sentence splitting, a subfield of text simplification, motivated largely by an unproven idea that if you divide a sentence in pieces, it should become easier to understand. Our primary goal in this paper is to find out whether this is true. In particular, we ask, does it matter whether we break a sentence into two or three? We report on our findings based on Amazon Mechanical Turk. More specifically, we introduce a Bayesian modeling framework to further investigate to what degree a particular way of splitting the complex sentence affects readability, along with a number of other parameters adopted from diverse perspectives, including clinical linguistics, and cognitive linguistics. The Bayesian modeling experiment provides clear evidence that bisecting the sentence leads to enhanced readability to a degree greater than what we create by trisection.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools