REVIEW 1 cited by
Consistency Evaluation of News Article Summaries Generated by Large (and Small) Language Models
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
Consistency Evaluation of News Article Summaries Generated by Large (and Small) Language Models
read the original abstract
Text summarizing is a critical Natural Language Processing (NLP) task with applications ranging from information retrieval to content generation. Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable promise in generating fluent abstractive summaries but they can produce hallucinated details not grounded in the source text. Regardless of the method of generating a summary, high quality automated evaluations remain an open area of investigation. This paper embarks on an exploration of text summarization with a diverse set of techniques, including TextRank, BART, Mistral-7B-Instruct, and OpenAI GPT-3.5-Turbo. The generated summaries are evaluated using traditional metrics such as the Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation (ROUGE) Score and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) Score, as well as LLM-powered evaluation methods that directly assess a generated summary's consistency with the source text. We introduce a meta evaluation score which directly assesses the performance of the LLM evaluation system (prompt + model). We find that that all summarization models produce consistent summaries when tested on the XL-Sum dataset, exceeding the consistency of the reference summaries.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Reexamining zero-shot summarization: Empirical investigation of trustworthiness of LLM-summarizers
Repeated zero-shot summaries from the same LLM and document vary substantially in semantic and factual scores, and this paper proposes stability coefficients as a benchmark for that variability.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.