REVIEW 1 cited by
Reinforcement Learning for Abstractive Question Summarization with Question-aware Semantic Rewards
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
read the original abstract
The growth of online consumer health questions has led to the necessity for reliable and accurate question answering systems. A recent study showed that manual summarization of consumer health questions brings significant improvement in retrieving relevant answers. However, the automatic summarization of long questions is a challenging task due to the lack of training data and the complexity of the related subtasks, such as the question focus and type recognition. In this paper, we introduce a reinforcement learning-based framework for abstractive question summarization. We propose two novel rewards obtained from the downstream tasks of (i) question-type identification and (ii) question-focus recognition to regularize the question generation model. These rewards ensure the generation of semantically valid questions and encourage the inclusion of key medical entities/foci in the question summary. We evaluated our proposed method on two benchmark datasets and achieved higher performance over state-of-the-art models. The manual evaluation of the summaries reveals that the generated questions are more diverse and have fewer factual inconsistencies than the baseline summaries
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Development and Validation of the Provider Documentation Summarization Quality Instrument for Large Language Models
PDSQI-9 is a 9-item instrument for rating LLM-generated clinical summaries; in a validation study with 7 physician raters and 779 summary evaluations, it showed Cronbach's alpha 0.879 and ICC 0.867, but Krippendorff's...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.