Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

FENICE: Factuality Evaluation of summarization based on Natural language Inference and Claim Extraction

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 2403.02270 v3 pith:OTZCMEDO submitted 2024-03-04 cs.CL

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

Recent advancements in text summarization, particularly with the advent of Large Language Models (LLMs), have shown remarkable performance. However, a notable challenge persists as a substantial number of automatically-generated summaries exhibit factual inconsistencies, such as hallucinations. In response to this issue, various approaches for the evaluation of consistency for summarization have emerged. Yet, these newly-introduced metrics face several limitations, including lack of interpretability, focus on short document summaries (e.g., news articles), and computational impracticality, especially for LLM-based metrics. To address these shortcomings, we propose Factuality Evaluation of summarization based on Natural language Inference and Claim Extraction (FENICE), a more interpretable and efficient factuality-oriented metric. FENICE leverages an NLI-based alignment between information in the source document and a set of atomic facts, referred to as claims, extracted from the summary. Our metric sets a new state of the art on AGGREFACT, the de-facto benchmark for factuality evaluation. Moreover, we extend our evaluation to a more challenging setting by conducting a human annotation process of long-form summarization. In the hope of fostering research in summarization factuality evaluation, we release the code of our metric and our factuality annotations of long-form summarization at https://github.com/Babelscape/FENICE.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. ARGUS: Hallucination and Omission Evaluation in Video-LLMs

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    ARGUS measures hallucination and omission in free-form video captions using LLM-based entailment and temporal alignment, finding that even the best video-LLM still produces roughly 40% hallucinated content.

  2. Fact-Controlled Diagnosis of Hallucinations in Medical Text Summarization

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A fact-alignment LLM method detects clinical summarization hallucinations better than existing metrics, with correlations of 0.43 on controlled data and 0.37 on natural errors.

  3. Taming LLMs with Negative Samples: A Reference-Free Framework to Evaluate Presentation Content with Actionable Feedback

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    REFLEX fine-tunes Phi-3-Mini on synthetic negative presentations to produce reference-free scores and actionable feedback for slide quality across coverage, redundancy, text-image alignment, and flow.

Pith tools