Pith. sign in

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

arxiv 2502.20647 v1 pith:J2B2WTUI submitted 2025-02-28 cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG

Consistency Evaluation of News Article Summaries Generated by Large (and Small) Language Models

classification cs.CL cs.AIcs.LG
keywords evaluationsummariestextconsistencygeneratedlanguagemodelsscore
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
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.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Reexamining zero-shot summarization: Empirical investigation of trustworthiness of LLM-summarizers

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    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.