Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

TLDR: Extreme Summarization of Scientific Documents

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 2004.15011 v3 pith:SVYPO4G2 submitted 2020-04-30 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords scitldrtldrtldrsannotationcattsextremegenerationintroduce
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce TLDR generation, a new form of extreme summarization, for scientific papers. TLDR generation involves high source compression and requires expert background knowledge and understanding of complex domain-specific language. To facilitate study on this task, we introduce SciTLDR, a new multi-target dataset of 5.4K TLDRs over 3.2K papers. SciTLDR contains both author-written and expert-derived TLDRs, where the latter are collected using a novel annotation protocol that produces high-quality summaries while minimizing annotation burden. We propose CATTS, a simple yet effective learning strategy for generating TLDRs that exploits titles as an auxiliary training signal. CATTS improves upon strong baselines under both automated metrics and human evaluations. Data and code are publicly available at https://github.com/allenai/scitldr.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Can Smaller LLMs do better? Unlocking Cross-Domain Potential through Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning for Text Summarization

    cs.CL 2025-09 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    PEFT adapters trained on high-resource summarization domains can improve Llama-3-8B's summaries on unseen domains, but the reported gains are weakened by test-set selection and missing significance tests.

  2. How Far Are AI Scientists from Changing the World?

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    This survey proposes a four-level capability framework for AI Scientist systems and, using an AI reviewer, finds that current systems produce papers rated well below normal scientific standards.

Pith tools