REVIEW 2 cited by
gTBLS: Generating Tables from Text by Conditional Question Answering
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
Distilling large, unstructured text into a structured, condensed form such as tables is an open research problem. One of the primary challenges in automatically generating tables is ensuring their syntactic validity. Prior approaches address this challenge by including additional parameters in the Transformer's attention mechanism to attend to specific rows and column headers. In contrast to this single-stage method, this paper presents a two-stage approach called Generative Tables (gTBLS). The first stage infers table structure (row and column headers) from the text. The second stage formulates questions using these headers and fine-tunes a causal language model to answer them. Furthermore, the gTBLS approach is amenable to the utilization of pre-trained Large Language Models in a zero-shot configuration, presenting a solution for table generation in situations where fine-tuning is not feasible. gTBLS improves prior approaches by up to 10% in BERTScore on the table construction task and up to 20% on the table content generation task of the E2E, WikiTableText, WikiBio, and RotoWire datasets.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Map&Make: Schema Guided Text to Table Generation
Map&Make decomposes text into atomic statements and uses them to iteratively plan and fill tables, improving information coverage over CoT and T3 baselines on Rotowire, Livesum, and Wiki40B.
-
A Survey on Evaluating Quality and Trustworthiness in LLM-Generated Data
A metric-oriented survey that classifies intrinsic quality and trustworthiness metrics for LLM-generated data across six modalities and documents systematic evaluation gaps in the current literature.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.