Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

HeLM: Highlighted Evidence augmented Language Model for Enhanced Table-to-Text Generation

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 2311.08896 v2 pith:EFGM3KKC submitted 2023-11-15 cs.CL

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

Large models have demonstrated significant progress across various domains, particularly in tasks related to text generation. In the domain of Table to Text, many Large Language Model (LLM)-based methods currently resort to modifying prompts to invoke public APIs, incurring potential costs and information leaks. With the advent of open-source large models, fine-tuning LLMs has become feasible. In this study, we conducted parameter-efficient fine-tuning on the LLaMA2 model. Distinguishing itself from previous fine-tuning-based table-to-text methods, our approach involves injecting reasoning information into the input by emphasizing table-specific row data. Our model consists of two modules: 1) a table reasoner that identifies relevant row evidence, and 2) a table summarizer that generates sentences based on the highlighted table. To facilitate this, we propose a search strategy to construct reasoning labels for training the table reasoner. On both the FetaQA and QTSumm datasets, our approach achieved state-of-the-art results. Additionally, we observed that highlighting input tables significantly enhances the model's performance and provides valuable interpretability.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. AI4Research: A Survey of Artificial Intelligence for Scientific Research

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that organizes AI-for-research work into five tasks, comprehension, survey, discovery, writing, and peer review, and compiles associated tools and benchmarks.

Pith tools