Entity-level Factual Adaptiveness of Fine-tuning based Abstractive Summarization Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.15162v1
• Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 07:53:39 GMT
• Title: Entity-level Factual Adaptiveness of Fine-tuning based Abstractive Summarization Models
• Authors: Jongyoon Song, Nohil Park, Bongkyu Hwang, Jaewoong Yun, Seongho Joe, Youngjune L. Gwon, Sungroh Yoon
• Abstract summary: We analyze the robustness of fine-tuning based summarization models to the knowledge conflict. We introduce a controllable counterfactual data augmentation method.
• Score: 31.84120883461332
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Abstractive summarization models often generate factually inconsistent content particularly when the parametric knowledge of the model conflicts with the knowledge in the input document. In this paper, we analyze the robustness of fine-tuning based summarization models to the knowledge conflict, which we call factual adaptiveness. We utilize pre-trained language models to construct evaluation sets and find that factual adaptiveness is not strongly correlated with factual consistency on original datasets. Furthermore, we introduce a controllable counterfactual data augmentation method where the degree of knowledge conflict within the augmented data can be adjustable. Our experimental results on two pre-trained language models (PEGASUS and BART) and two fine-tuning datasets (XSum and CNN/DailyMail) demonstrate that our method enhances factual adaptiveness while achieving factual consistency on original datasets on par with the contrastive learning baseline.

Related papers

• Unveiling Imitation Learning: Exploring the Impact of Data Falsity to Large Language Model [6.097530398802087]
  This paper explores the correlation between the degree of noise and its impact on language models through instruction tuning. Specifically, we found multiple intriguing findings of the correlation between the factuality of the dataset and instruction tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-15T12:20:09Z)
• Fake It Till Make It: Federated Learning with Consensus-Oriented Generation [52.82176415223988]
  We propose federated learning with consensus-oriented generation (FedCOG) FedCOG consists of two key components at the client side: complementary data generation and knowledge-distillation-based model training. Experiments on classical and real-world FL datasets show that FedCOG consistently outperforms state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-10T18:49:59Z)
• Alleviating the Effect of Data Imbalance on Adversarial Training [26.36714114672729]
  We study adversarial training on datasets that obey the long-tailed distribution. We propose a new adversarial training framework -- Re-balancing Adversarial Training (REAT)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-14T07:01:48Z)
• Preserving Knowledge Invariance: Rethinking Robustness Evaluation of Open Information Extraction [50.62245481416744]
  We present the first benchmark that simulates the evaluation of open information extraction models in the real world. We design and annotate a large-scale testbed in which each example is a knowledge-invariant clique. By further elaborating the robustness metric, a model is judged to be robust if its performance is consistently accurate on the overall cliques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T12:05:09Z)
• Large Language Models with Controllable Working Memory [64.71038763708161]
  Large language models (LLMs) have led to a series of breakthroughs in natural language processing (NLP) What further sets these models apart is the massive amounts of world knowledge they internalize during pretraining. How the model's world knowledge interacts with the factual information presented in the context remains under explored.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-09T18:58:29Z)
• Correcting Diverse Factual Errors in Abstractive Summarization via Post-Editing and Language Model Infilling [56.70682379371534]
  We show that our approach vastly outperforms prior methods in correcting erroneous summaries. Our model -- FactEdit -- improves factuality scores by over 11 points on CNN/DM and over 31 points on XSum.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-22T07:16:19Z)
• CLIFF: Contrastive Learning for Improving Faithfulness and Factuality in Abstractive Summarization [6.017006996402699]
  We study generating abstractive summaries that are faithful and factually consistent with the given articles. A novel contrastive learning formulation is presented, which leverages both reference summaries, as positive training data, and automatically generated erroneous summaries, as negative training data, to train summarization systems that are better at distinguishing between them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-19T20:05:21Z)
• Exploring Strategies for Generalizable Commonsense Reasoning with Pre-trained Models [62.28551903638434]
  We measure the impact of three different adaptation methods on the generalization and accuracy of models. Experiments with two models show that fine-tuning performs best, by learning both the content and the structure of the task, but suffers from overfitting and limited generalization to novel answers. We observe that alternative adaptation methods like prefix-tuning have comparable accuracy, but generalize better to unseen answers and are more robust to adversarial splits.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-07T03:13:06Z)
• A Multi-Level Attention Model for Evidence-Based Fact Checking [58.95413968110558]
  We present a simple model that can be trained on sequence structures. Results on a large-scale dataset for Fact Extraction and VERification show that our model outperforms the graph-based approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T05:40:12Z)
• Improving Commonsense Causal Reasoning by Adversarial Training and Data Augmentation [14.92157586545743]
  This paper presents a number of techniques for making models more robust in the domain of causal reasoning. We show a statistically significant improvement on performance and on both datasets, even with only a small number of additionally generated data points.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-13T09:55:29Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.