Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 28 references

Real-time News Story Identification

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A real-time pipeline assigns news articles to ongoing stories as they appear online, using online stream clustering with named-entity-based post-merging; on a 6,400-article Slovene dataset it reaches AMI 0.569 against 0.838 for offline…

desk verdict Solid engineering combination for real-time news story identification, but the abstract's human-evaluation claim is unsupported and the ground-truth labels come from the paradigm being replaced. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.08272 v1 pith:NXTTT5S5 submitted 2025-07-30 cs.CL

Tadej Škvorc , Nikola Ivačič , Sebastjan Hribar , Marko Robnik-Šikonja This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CL MSC 68T5062H30
keywords storyidentificationreal-timenewsclusteringonlinetopicmodelingnamedentityrecognitionmonitoringBGE-M3DBSTREAMTextClust
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that news articles can be assigned to evolving stories as they appear online, without rerunning a full clustering algorithm over the entire archive each time. The proposed system embeds articles, detects named entities, feeds the vectors through an online stream clusterer such as DBSTREAM or TextClust, optionally guided by BERTopic, and then merges micro-clusters whose topic terms or named entities overlap within a 10-day window. On a labeled set of 6,400 Slovene articles covering 4,028 stories, the best real-time configuration reaches an adjusted mutual information (AMI) score of 0.569, compared with 0.838 for offline $k$-means with the same BGE-M3 embeddings. The paper's central claim is that this real-time result is sensible for production news monitoring, even though it does not match offline quality.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the micro-cluster-plus-post-merge design. Online stream clusterers create micro-clusters with a fading factor $\lambda$ that gradually reduces the weight of older articles and effectively expires stories after 10 days; a separate batch step then merges micro-clusters when their topic-modeling keywords or named entities are close enough. Named entity recognition supplies the entities, BGE-M3 supplies dense text embeddings, and BERTopic supplies the topic terms. The 10-day window is the time-based constraint that defines a story's lifespan and sets the fading schedule.

What would settle it

Take a sample of the same 6,400 Slovene articles and have independent annotators, blind to the system output and to the company's clustering, assign them to stories; if the real-time pipeline's agreement with those independent labels is far below the 0.569 AMI reported against the company-restructured labels, the paper's evidence for sensible real-time story identification would collapse.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that online topic-modeling and stream-clustering methods can be adapted to story identification, and that the main gains come from a post-clustering merge step driven by named entities. Plain DBSTREAM with BERTopic reaches an AMI of 0.398; adding a merging step that compares topic terms computed on named entities lifts it to 0.569. Named entities alone are better than full text for detecting single-article stories (outlier classification accuracy 0.762 versus 0.720), but they slightly hurt general clustering (AMI 0.678 versus 0.838), so the paper's recommended design uses full-text embeddings for clustering and named entities for outlier detection and merging. The paper presents the pipeline as a viable real-time alternative to the offline graph-based clustering that the evaluation labels were derived from.

Load-bearing premise

The evaluation labels correctly represent what a news story is; they were created by hand from the output of the company's existing embedding-and-Louvain clustering pipeline, and every automatic score in the paper compares against those labels.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Production monitoring systems can assign articles to stories continuously as they arrive, without waiting for a full re-clustering of the archive.
  • Named entities are a cheap, high-value signal for outlier detection and for merging clusters that describe the same people, places, or events.
  • The gap between the best online result (AMI 0.569) and the offline result (AMI 0.838) quantifies the price of real-time processing on this dataset.
  • Summarizing articles before embedding does not help and hurts clustering performance, so the pipeline can skip summarization and save runtime.
  • The approach is built from language-dependent components such as embeddings, named entity recognition, and topic modeling, so transferring it to another language requires replacing those components; the paper evaluates only Slovene data.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The 10-day fading window caps story length by construction; long-running investigations that span more than ten days would be split into separate stories, so a multi-scale time window is a natural testable extension.
  • Because the evaluation labels were produced by manually restructuring the output of the company's existing embedding-and-Louvain pipeline, the reported AMI may partly measure agreement with that pipeline's notion of a story rather than an independent ground truth.
  • The batching of post-clustering merges after each day's articles means the system is real-time only up to a one-day lag; applications that need instant alerts would require a finer merge schedule.
  • The threshold for outlier detection was tuned on a random 10% development slice of the same dataset, so its transfer to other time periods, languages, or news domains is untested.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a real-time news story identification pipeline that combines text embeddings (BGE-M3, TF-IDF, DistilBERT, etc.), named entity recognition, optional summarization, online clustering algorithms (DBSTREAM, TextClust) and BERTopic-based topic modeling, plus post-clustering merging and outlier detection. The method is evaluated on a Slovene news dataset of 6,400 articles labeled with 4,028 stories over a ten-day window in March 2023. The authors report automatic metrics (AMI, Silhouette, outlier classification accuracy) for offline and online configurations, with the best online configuration (DBSTREAM with named entities and topic-term merging) reaching AMI 0.569, compared to offline BGE-M3 k-means AMI 0.838. The abstract claims that the approach 'produces sensible results as judged by human evaluators,' but no direct human evaluation of the proposed system's output is reported in the body.

Significance. If the central claims were fully supported, the paper would offer a practically useful contribution to media monitoring: a real-time story identification system with a systematic comparison of text representations, online clustering methods, and post-clustering heuristics. The ablation structure is a strength, and the focus on named entities and time constraints is well motivated by the story identification task. However, the current evidence is not sufficient to support the headline claim of human-judged quality, because the evaluation labels are derived from the same offline clustering paradigm the authors aim to replace, and the reported metrics are purely automatic.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 5] The abstract states that the real-time approach 'produces sensible results as judged by human evaluators,' but Section 5 reports only automatic AMI, Silhouette, and outlier classification accuracy against the Section 3 labeled dataset. There is no reported evaluation in which human evaluators judge the stories produced by the proposed system. The human involvement described in Section 3 is limited to the construction of the labeled dataset, not to assessing the output of the proposed pipeline. This is load-bearing: the headline claim as written is unsupported by the evidence in the paper. Either add a genuine human evaluation of the proposed system's output or revise the abstract and conclusion to state that the system is evaluated only against a reference labeling.
  2. [Section 3 and Section 5] The ground-truth labels used throughout Section 5 are generated by 'replicat[ing] the current system's dynamic clustering method' (embeddings, pairwise cosine similarity threshold tau, Louvain community detection with gamma = 0.1), followed by manual re-evaluation, restructuring, and re-ordering by the media monitoring company. The proposed method is therefore evaluated against labels derived from the same graph-based, offline clustering paradigm that the paper aims to replace. High AMI values may partly reflect agreement with the old system's clustering behavior rather than with independently established story identity. This circularity weakens every quantitative comparison in Tables 1-5. The authors should provide independent human story annotations (e.g., with inter-annotator agreement) or otherwise validate that the reference labels represent true story identity rather than the output of one particular clustering paradigm.
  3. [Section 4.2.2 and Section 5.3] Several load-bearing hyperparameters are introduced without sensitivity analysis or a clear validation protocol: the outlier distance threshold (Section 5.1), the fading factor lambda tied to the assumed 10-day story window (Section 4.2.2), the post-clustering merge threshold d (Section 5.3), and the ground-truth generation thresholds tau and gamma (Section 3). The paper states that the outlier threshold is set on a random 10% development sample, but it does not report how the other thresholds were selected or whether they were tuned on the same test set. Since the claimed practical advantage is real-time deployability, the robustness of results to these choices should be demonstrated, for example by reporting parameter sweeps or a train/validation/test split for all tuned parameters.
  4. [Section 5.2] The online clustering evaluation in Table 4 and the post-clustering results in Table 5 report single AMI values per configuration with no indication of variance, number of runs, or statistical significance. Online clustering algorithms and the batch simulation (initial 10% set, then batches of 10 articles) may be sensitive to initialization and ordering; a single run cannot establish that one configuration reliably outperforms another. The authors should report multiple runs or at least a sensitivity analysis over random seeds and batch compositions.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.2.3] The wording 'we first manually detect outliers using a distance-based threshold' and 'We manually cluster similar micro-clusters' is confusing: the surrounding text indicates that these are automated, threshold-based procedures, not manual inspection. Please replace 'manually' with 'algorithmically' or specify where human intervention actually occurs.
  2. [Section 5.1] The outlier evaluation uses a balanced 50/50 split of outliers and non-outliers, which changes the base rate relative to the natural dataset (where most stories are singletons). The reported outlier classification accuracy is therefore not directly interpretable as performance on the real distribution; reporting precision/recall or an unbalanced evaluation would be more informative.
  3. [Throughout] The text contains typographical and formatting errors, e.g., 'Theever-increasingamountofglobalnewspresentsanoverwhelmingchal-lenge' in the Introduction and the missing space in 'BERTopic Grootendorst [12]' in Section 4.2.1. A careful proofreading pass is needed.
  4. [Section 5.1] Table 1 reports BGE-M3 as 0.8378 while the text says 0.838; please make the rounding consistent. Additionally, the claim in Section 5.1 that 'using only named entities outperforms using only the text' refers specifically to outlier accuracy, not to overall clustering; clarifying this would avoid misreading.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the online story-identification pipeline is evaluated against an externally constructed labeled dataset, and the abstract's 'human evaluators' phrasing is an evidentiary gap rather than a by-construction reduction.

full rationale

The paper contains no load-bearing circular step. The evaluation labels are described as produced by replicating the company's existing graph-based clustering pipeline and then manually re-evaluated, restructured, and re-ordered by the media monitoring company (Section 3). This makes the labels potentially biased toward the old system's behavior, but it does not make the proposed method's outputs equivalent to its inputs by construction: the online algorithms (DBSTREAM, TextClust, BERTopic) and embeddings (BGE-M3) are external components, and the reported AMI scores measure agreement with the labels rather than being defined from them. The outlier threshold is tuned on a 10% development split, which is standard practice and not a fitted input renamed as a prediction. Self-citations to the Slovene NER model and the Slovene summarizer are component choices, not load-bearing theorems, and the summarizer is explicitly dropped because it hurts performance. The abstract's claim that results are 'judged by human evaluators' is not supported by the body, where human input appears only in the construction of the reference labels, but that is a missing-evidence or overclaim problem, not a circularity problem. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited, and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The pipeline relies on two fitted thresholds (outlier distance, merge distance), a fading factor tied to the 10-day story assumption, and the ground-truth generation hyperparameters. The core assumptions are that stories are at most 10 days old, that named entities are the main story discriminators, and that the company-produced labels are correct. No new theoretical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • outlier detection distance threshold = not reported
    Set as the mean of average nearest-article distances for outliers and non-outliers on a 10% development set (Section 5.1) and used to flag outliers in the balanced test set.
  • fading factor lambda = not reported
    Chosen so that articles older than 10 days have near-zero weight (Section 4.2.2); its value depends on the 10-day story window assumption.
  • post-clustering merge threshold d = not reported
    Repeatedly merges micro-clusters closer than this threshold (Section 5.3); the numerical value is not disclosed.
  • ground-truth generation hyperparameters (similarity threshold tau and Louvain resolution gamma=0.1) = tau not reported, gamma=0.1
    Used to construct the labeled evaluation dataset in Section 3 by replicating the company's graph-based clustering; these values influence the labels that all evaluation metrics are computed against.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption A story contains articles from at most 10 days
    Section 4.2.2 states this as an assumption based on Kliping's historical data; it controls the fading factor and the time window in both online clustering and post-clustering merging.
  • domain assumption Named entities are the key discriminators for story identity
    The method relies on NER for outlier detection and cluster merging (Sections 4.1.2 and 5.3); if stories are distinguished by other cues (such as quotes or tone), this premise weakens.
  • domain assumption The ground-truth story labels produced by the company's graph-based clustering, manual re-evaluation, and restructuring are correct
    Section 3 describes the dataset as manually re-evaluated, restructured, and re-ordered by the media monitoring company; all evaluation metrics in Section 5 treat these labels as ground truth.
  • domain assumption The NER model (SloNER) and the Slovene summarizer produce reliable outputs
    The pipeline depends on SloNER for named entity extraction (Section 4.1.2) and a Slovene summarizer (Section 4.1.3); errors in these components propagate into clustering and merging.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Real-time News Story Identification." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NXTTT5S5

@misc{pith2026250808272,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Real-time News Story Identification},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NXTTT5S5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.08272}
}
read the original abstract

To improve the reading experience, many news sites organize news into topical collections, called stories. In this work, we present an approach for implementing real-time story identification for a news monitoring system that automatically collects news articles as they appear online and processes them in various ways. Story identification aims to assign each news article to a specific story that the article is covering. The process is similar to text clustering and topic modeling, but requires that articles be grouped based on particular events, places, and people, rather than general text similarity (as in clustering) or general (predefined) topics (as in topic modeling). We present an approach to story identification that is capable of functioning in real time, assigning articles to stories as they are published online. In the proposed approach, we combine text representation techniques, clustering algorithms, and online topic modeling methods. We combine various text representation methods to extract specific events and named entities necessary for story identification, showing that a mixture of online topic-modeling approaches such as BERTopic, DBStream, and TextClust can be adapted for story discovery. We evaluate our approach on a news dataset from Slovene media covering a period of 1 month. We show that our real-time approach produces sensible results as judged by human evaluators.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.08272 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The distribution of languages in all samples (Serbian, Slovene, Bosnian, Mace [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The distribution of selected industry sector labels across our sample. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The distribution of story sizes in our labeled dataset. The left side of the graph [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The schematic overview of the proposed approach to news story identification. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: An example of macro clusters obtained through iterative clustering and topic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    GPT-4 technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023

    Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Florencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, et al. GPT-4 technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    A framework for clustering evolving data streams

    Charu C Aggarwal, S Yu Philip, Jiawei Han, and Jianyong Wang. A framework for clustering evolving data streams. In Proceedings 2003 VLDB conference, pages 81–92. Elsevier, 2003

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    Textual one-pass stream clustering with automated distance threshold adaption

    Dennis Assenmacher and Heike Trautmann. Textual one-pass stream clustering with automated distance threshold adaption. InAsian con- ference on intelligent information and database systems, pages 3–16. Springer, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    MS MARCO: A human generated machine reading comprehension dataset

    Payal Bajaj, Daniel Campos, Nick Craswell, Li Deng, Jianfeng Gao, Xiaodong Liu, Rangan Majumder, Andrew McNamara, Bhaskar Mitra, Tri Nguyen, et al. MS MARCO: A human generated machine reading comprehension dataset. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.09268, 2016

    arXiv 2016

  5. [5]

    Latent Dirichlet allocation.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 2003

    DM Blei, AY Ng, and MI Jordan. Latent Dirichlet allocation.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 2003

    work page 2003

  6. [6]

    V. D. Blondel, J. L. Guillaume, R. Lambiotte, and E. Lefebvre. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks.J. Stat. Mech.-Theory Exp., 2008:P10008, 2008

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    BGE M3-embedding: Multi-lingual, multi-functionality, multi-granularity text embeddings through self-knowledge distillation

    Jianlv Chen, Shitao Xiao, Peitian Zhang, Kun Luo, Defu Lian, and Zheng Liu. BGE M3-embedding: Multi-lingual, multi-functionality, multi-granularity text embeddings through self-knowledge distillation. arXiv, 2402.03216, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Mean shift, mode seeking, and clustering.IEEE transac- tions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 17(8):790–799, 1995

    Yizong Cheng. Mean shift, mode seeking, and clustering.IEEE transac- tions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 17(8):790–799, 1995

    1995

Show all 28 references
  1. [9]

    BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language un- derstanding

    Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language un- derstanding. InProceedings of the 2019 conference of the North Ameri- can chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human la...

    2019

  2. [10]

    A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise

    Martin Ester, Hans-Peter Kriegel, Jörg Sander, Xiaowei Xu, et al. A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise. InProceedings of KDD, pages 226–231, 1996

    1996

  3. [11]

    KeyBERT: Minimal keyword extraction with BERT, 2020

    Maarten Grootendorst. KeyBERT: Minimal keyword extraction with BERT, 2020. URLhttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4461265

    2020 doi

  4. [12]

    BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class- based TF-IDF procedure.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.05794, 2022

    Maarten Grootendorst. BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class- based TF-IDF procedure.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.05794, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Clustering data streams based on shared density between micro-clusters.IEEE transactions on knowl- edge and data engineering, 28(6):1449–1461, 2016

    Michael Hahsler and Matthew Bolaños. Clustering data streams based on shared density between micro-clusters.IEEE transactions on knowl- edge and data engineering, 28(6):1449–1461, 2016

    2016

  6. [14]

    Distributional structure.Word, 10(2-3):146–162, 1954

    Zellig S Harris. Distributional structure.Word, 10(2-3):146–162, 1954

    1954

  7. [15]

    Deepseek-v3 technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.19437, 2024

    Aixin Liu, Bei Feng, Bing Xue, Bingxuan Wang, Bochao Wu, Chengda Lu, Chenggang Zhao, Chengqi Deng, Chenyu Zhang, Chong Ruan, et al. Deepseek-v3 technical report.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.19437, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Some methods for classification and analysis of multi- variate observations

    James MacQueen. Some methods for classification and analysis of multi- variate observations. InProceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, Volume 1: Statistics, volume 5, pages 281–298. University of California press, 1967

    1967

  9. [17]

    Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space

    Tomas Mikolov. Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1301.3781, 3781, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Streaming-data algorithms for high-quality clustering

    Liadan O’callaghan, Nina Mishra, Adam Meyerson, Sudipto Guha, and Rajeev Motwani. Streaming-data algorithms for high-quality clustering. In Proceedings 18th international conference on data engineering, pages 685–694. IEEE, 2002

    2002

  11. [19]

    Pytorch model for Slovenian named entity recognition SloNER 1.0

    Marko Prelevikj, Slavko Žitnik, and Timotej Knez. Pytorch model for Slovenian named entity recognition SloNER 1.0. Technical report, Uni- versityofLjubljana, FacultyofComputerandInformationScience, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Sentence-BERT: Sentence em- beddings using Siamese BERT-networks

    Nils Reimers and Iryna Gurevych. Sentence-BERT: Sentence em- beddings using Siamese BERT-networks. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Pro- cessing. Association for Computational Linguistics, 11 2019. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1908.10084. 22

    2019 arXiv

  13. [21]

    DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter

    Victor Sanh, Lysandre Debut, Julien Chaumond, and Thomas Wolf. DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lighter. ArXiv, abs/1910.01108, 2019

    1910 arXiv

  14. [22]

    A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval.Journal of documentation, 28(1):11–21, 1972

    Karen Sparck Jones. A statistical interpretation of term specificity and its application in retrieval.Journal of documentation, 28(1):11–21, 1972

    1972

  15. [23]

    Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971, 2023

    Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix, Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Attention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  17. [25]

    TSDAE: Using transformer-based sequential denoising auto-encoder for unsupervised sentence embedding learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.06979, 2021

    Kexin Wang, Nils Reimers, and Iryna Gurevych. TSDAE: Using transformer-based sequential denoising auto-encoder for unsupervised sentence embedding learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.06979, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Multilingual e5 text embeddings: A technical report

    Liang Wang, Nan Yang, Xiaolong Huang, Linjun Yang, Rangan Ma- jumder, and Furu Wei. Multilingual e5 text embeddings: A technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.05672, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    A robust EM clus- tering algorithm for Gaussian mixture models.Pattern Recognition, 45 (11):3950–3961, 2012

    Miin-Shen Yang, Chien-Yo Lai, and Chih-Ying Lin. A robust EM clus- tering algorithm for Gaussian mixture models.Pattern Recognition, 45 (11):3950–3961, 2012

    2012

  20. [28]

    One model to rule them all: Ranking Slovene summarizers

    Aleš Žagar and Marko Robnik-Šikonja. One model to rule them all: Ranking Slovene summarizers. In International Conference on Text, Speech, and Dialogue, pages 15–24, 2023. 23

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.