REVIEW 1 cited by
Understanding Metrics for Paraphrasing
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
abstract
Paraphrase generation is a difficult problem. This is not only because of the limitations in text generation capabilities but also due that to the lack of a proper definition of what qualifies as a paraphrase and corresponding metrics to measure how good it is. Metrics for evaluation of paraphrasing quality is an on going research problem. Most of the existing metrics in use having been borrowed from other tasks do not capture the complete essence of a good paraphrase, and often fail at borderline-cases. In this work, we propose a novel metric $ROUGE_P$ to measure the quality of paraphrases along the dimensions of adequacy, novelty and fluency. We also provide empirical evidence to show that the current natural language generation metrics are insufficient to measure these desired properties of a good paraphrase. We look at paraphrase model fine-tuning and generation from the lens of metrics to gain a deeper understanding of what it takes to generate and evaluate a good paraphrase.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
AMPS: ASR with Multimodal Paraphrase Supervision
Adding a threshold-gated paraphrase objective to a multimodal ASR model reduces WER by up to about 5 percent relative on conversational speech in Hindi, Marathi, Malayalam, Kannada, and Nyanja.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.